Freenet is a software-only system that already stores information with strong encryption. Any individual freenet node cannot be reasonably scanned for certain content, IIRC.
Robots Wars is horrible. It isn't a sport, not when the "loser" is subjected to destruction by the House Bots. No real reason to that other than entertaining the crowd.
If I had build a bot, I wouldn't mind my opponent ripping it to shreds, that's what it's there for. But to have the House Bots shred my work just for ratings, that's just silly and a waste of my money.
I've taped every episode, sans commercials (yeah, take that comment and shove it).
The shows are 21-22 minutes long, including this season. Past seasons they'd get 3 fights in a half hour segment, this season they're doing 4 by choosing a short-and-sweet first fight.
Granted the "Professor Carmen" stuff really sucks, but I do like to hear a little bit about the builders. And even though Bill and Tim can be a little annoying, they do keep the history of certain bots going.
Remember, some builders (and specific bots) have been attending the event for YEARS. Perfect example is Dallas Goecker and Sallad, whom was featured this week and has a strong showing.
That's too bad, you missed some of the great matches. Say like Vlad the Impaler getting CUT IN HALF by Mechavore. Or Nightmare, both giving hits as well as getting smashed to pieces.
Granted, the addition of Carmen "I got boobs" Electra has certainly made the SHOW a farce, but Battlebots is NOT a show. It's an event that Comedy Central covers, just like Monday Night Football.
The weapons restrictions serve two purposes. One, they make it safe enough to do with spectators (I was at Vegas 2000, the show is NOTHING compared to being there). Two, with unrestricted weapons it would quickly become a contest of money, not design.
Finally, you were trying to say 'autonomous' bots. Check your local dictionary, remotely controlled devices fall under the definition of robot.
But you forget, the public already has a bunch of crap enabled (say like Internet Explorer) not because they choose to, but because it was enabled by default and they wouldn't know how to turn it off assuming they eventually figured out what it was.
This is not new behavior, witness the unset VCR clock.
Bunk. Most folks who setup home networks are also smart enough to know they need a decent firewall, which is routing, which means said hub argument means zippo.
Granted, there are plenty of clueless people that pay their ISPs for extra address and then just plug all their machines into a hub with the ISP's device, but in that case their paying for that privledge AND the ISP is well aware of that.
>>Mail daemon is on and collecting mail from the network. >>Where the heck else is smtp going to collect mail from??
>It could just be routing mail between local >accounts. Maybe that configuration isn't so common >anymore, but it does have the longest history. >Anyway, what's important security-wise is that >local routing doesn't require an SMTP server.
Latest Redhat installs sendmail listening on loopback (127.0.0.1) for a reason. Why? Some utilities (can't give you an example) that need to send email only speak SMTP, instead of using mail or sendmail.
I see. So, you don't go for the whole "Melting Pot of the World" idea? The foundation of this country was religous freedom. Not religions limited to Christianity, but all religions as well as those praticing NO religion. Granted, the founding fathers didn't really intend this as it was beyond their limited scope, but we have become more enlightened as a people since then, as well as adding swells of different religous viewpoints, all from American Citizens.
What right do the majority have to make the minority pay homage to the majority's views?
Serveral versions of OpenSSH's sshd between 2.3.1 and 3.3
contain an input validation error that can result in an
integer overflow and privilege escalation.
All versions between 2.3.1 and 3.3 contain a bug in the
PAMAuthenticationViaKbdInt code.
All versions between 2.9.9 and 3.3 contain a bug in the
ChallengeResponseAuthentication code.
OpenSSH 3.4 and later are not affected.
OpenSSH 3.2 and later prevent privilege escalation if
UsePrivilegeSeparation is enabled in sshd_config. OpenSSH
3.3 enables UsePrivilegeSeparation by default.
Although some earlier versions are not affected upgrading
to OpenSSH 3.4 is recommended, because OpenSSH 3.4 adds
checks for a class of potential bugs.
2. Impact:
This bug can be exploited remotely if
ChallengeResponseAuthentication
is enabled in sshd_config.
Affected are at least systems supporting s/key over
SSH protocol version 2 (OpenBSD, FreeBSD and NetBSD
as well as other systems supporting s/key with SSH).
Exploitablitly of systems using
PAMAuthenticationViaKbdInt
has not been verified.
3. Short-Term Solution:
Disable ChallengeResponseAuthentication in sshd_config.
and
Disable PAMAuthenticationViaKbdInt in sshd_config.
Alternatively you can prevent privilege escalation
if you enable UsePrivilegeSeparation in sshd_config.
4. Solution:
Upgrade to OpenSSH 3.4 or apply the following patches.
"OpenSSH supports the SKEY and BSD_AUTH authentication options. These are
compile-time options. At least one of these options must be enabled
before the OpenSSH binaries are compiled for the vulnerable condition to
be present. OpenBSD 3.0 and later is distributed with BSD_AUTH enabled.
The SKEY and BSD_AUTH options are not enabled by default in many
distributions. However, if these options are explicitly enabled, that
build of OpenSSH may be vulnerable."
Granted, ISS X-Force is proving to be the bad child in the group, they may once again be inaccurate in their race to get "credit".
No, I'd do both. You need an immediate stop on the employee's behavior (the original poster tried to walk away several times, how would he make it to a phone?). Verbally calling would be the right thing. Pressing the police for assault charges would also be a good thing, gets managements attention that there is a problem.
In short, when presented with two good ideas, do both if possible.
From the situation you describe, your small office is on the road to disaster. Until you can get someone to buy into the fact the computers and network are CRITICAL to the function of the business, you're not going to get anywhere and gain nothing but PAIN.
Backup is just one part of a keeping IT functions online and working. What about user installed software? Virus scanning? Configuration management? Hardware replacement? Just to name a few items. Without support from the heads of the office, forget it.
This all assumes, of course, that the IT functions are in fact critical to the business!!
This is incredibly stupid on "United Linux"'s part. The First Person has to buy the binaries, they then get the source and have the right to redistribute the binaries AND code to whomever. Do they really want just one paying customer? Ooookay!
One wonders if the use of the Trademark Linux by this conglomerate will come under fire.:)
Show up on a disc golf course with a Frisbee and you might as well stamp "Newbie" on your forehead.
Golf discs are heavier and hurt like hell if you are moronic enough to try to play catch with one.:)
Not to mention you'll have a hard time throwing Ye Olde Frisbee much over 100 feet. Drives to 350 feet are average for a regular disc golfer. Like me.:)
After browsing through the comments, it's obvious why Apple is still in business. Some people like to buy things because they look good and for no other reason.
The really stupid part about that is eventually 5 GHz will have the exact same problem. Going to 5 GHz is not a real solution, it's just delaying the impact of the problem.
If Merril Lynch set themselves up to ALLOW "some 15 year old KDE contributer" to cause major system damage, then they're to blame. Period. Take your loss and thank you for playing Business.
If I'm in an accident and injured due to a manufacturer defect that is determined to be negligence, you bet your ass the manufacturer is to blame and will pay. Nobody gets a "I screwed up, I get out of Jail Free" card. Yet that's EXACTLY what people are expecting when they talk about "accountability" and Linux.
And before you make some ass comment about sue-happy people, I got my balls ripped open in high school due to an act of negligence and a volleyball net in gym. Could I have sued the school? Yes. Did I? No. I got my 9 stiches and vowed not to run under volleyball nets anymore.
"Even more important, who is accountable?
Linux is an amalgamation of the input of
many companies and individual software
engineers. So whom do you call when it
breaks?"
*gasp* Merril Lynch would be the ones responsible for their own systems. Goodness, we certainly can't have that!
/sarcasm
This argument is so tired. If you're in business and have to worry about whom you can blame if the stuff hits the fan (read YOU SCREW UP), then I'd really prefer you weren't in business. As a customer, I respect a company that owns up to screwing up and making it right. I hold in contempt those that point the finger at someone else.
Ah, you mistake my words. Nowhere did I say I personally was excluded from People.:) Again, People refers to a large group of Persons. Persons can be very smart and intelligent, People are stupid.
As far as "Windows works for me", for every 1 person I talk to who has a handle on their Windows workstation and doesn't complain about the "Reinstall every 3 months" or "Reboot daily or twice on Wednesdays" rules of thumb, there are 30 people that do whine and ask "What's Linux?".
My favorite expression is the 90/10 rule, which I define as this:
"On any given subject, 90% of People are Idiots."
That rule certainly applies to me.
Now, on to the point at hand, am I a Windoze Luser when it comes to other consumer products? I would say I'm not. If I have a problem with a given product, I either:
A) Don't buy/use that product. (Cable TV is going on this list) B) Modify said product to do what I want. (Hmm, these rails don't quite fit my rack setup. Where's my jigsaw?) C) Put up and shutup. (I guess gas-driven automobiles fall here)
Slashdot Mirror
Freenet is a software-only system that already stores information with strong encryption. Any individual freenet node cannot be reasonably scanned for certain content, IIRC.
http://freenetproject.org/
So, as the tagline goes.....
by leaving out the most important FAQ:
"How do you pronounce that?"
Aye!!
Carmen and her ilk can just go away. I didn't think she could be any worse than the "who am I" wench from season 2, boy was I wrong.
Please, whomever gets BattleBots next, do NOT include a Carmen-esque commentator. Dan Danknick on the other hand....
See the full Middleweight field here.
4 wins Jon, nice work!
No, autonomy is not a part of the definition of robot.
See http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=robot
"2. A machine or device that operates automatically or by remote control."
Robots Wars is horrible. It isn't a sport, not when the "loser" is subjected to destruction by the House Bots. No real reason to that other than entertaining the crowd.
If I had build a bot, I wouldn't mind my opponent ripping it to shreds, that's what it's there for. But to have the House Bots shred my work just for ratings, that's just silly and a waste of my money.
*sigh*
I've taped every episode, sans commercials (yeah, take that comment and shove it).
The shows are 21-22 minutes long, including this season. Past seasons they'd get 3 fights in a half hour segment, this season they're doing 4 by choosing a short-and-sweet first fight.
Granted the "Professor Carmen" stuff really sucks, but I do like to hear a little bit about the builders. And even though Bill and Tim can be a little annoying, they do keep the history of certain bots going.
Remember, some builders (and specific bots) have been attending the event for YEARS. Perfect example is Dallas Goecker and Sallad, whom was featured this week and has a strong showing.
> I stopped watching Battlebots after season 2.
That's too bad, you missed some of the great matches. Say like Vlad the Impaler getting CUT IN HALF by Mechavore. Or Nightmare, both giving hits as well as getting smashed to pieces.
Granted, the addition of Carmen "I got boobs" Electra has certainly made the SHOW a farce, but Battlebots is NOT a show. It's an event that Comedy Central covers, just like Monday Night Football.
The weapons restrictions serve two purposes. One, they make it safe enough to do with spectators (I was at Vegas 2000, the show is NOTHING compared to being there). Two, with unrestricted weapons it would quickly become a contest of money, not design.
Finally, you were trying to say 'autonomous' bots. Check your local dictionary, remotely controlled devices fall under the definition of robot.
But you forget, the public already has a bunch of crap enabled (say like Internet Explorer) not because they choose to, but because it was enabled by default and they wouldn't know how to turn it off assuming they eventually figured out what it was.
This is not new behavior, witness the unset VCR clock.
Bunk. Most folks who setup home networks are also smart enough to know they need a decent firewall, which is routing, which means said hub argument means zippo.
Granted, there are plenty of clueless people that pay their ISPs for extra address and then just plug all their machines into a hub with the ISP's device, but in that case their paying for that privledge AND the ISP is well aware of that.
>>Mail daemon is on and collecting mail from the network.
>>Where the heck else is smtp going to collect mail from??
>It could just be routing mail between local >accounts. Maybe that configuration isn't so common
>anymore, but it does have the longest history.
>Anyway, what's important security-wise is that
>local routing doesn't require an SMTP server.
Latest Redhat installs sendmail listening on loopback (127.0.0.1) for a reason. Why? Some utilities (can't give you an example) that need to send email only speak SMTP, instead of using mail or sendmail.
I see. So, you don't go for the whole "Melting Pot of the World" idea? The foundation of this country was religous freedom. Not religions limited to Christianity, but all religions as well as those praticing NO religion. Granted, the founding fathers didn't really intend this as it was beyond their limited scope, but we have become more enlightened as a people since then, as well as adding swells of different religous viewpoints, all from American Citizens.
What right do the majority have to make the minority pay homage to the majority's views?
From announce@openbsd.org:
"
This is the 2nd revision of the Advisory.
1. Versions affected:
Serveral versions of OpenSSH's sshd between 2.3.1 and 3.3
contain an input validation error that can result in an
integer overflow and privilege escalation.
All versions between 2.3.1 and 3.3 contain a bug in the
PAMAuthenticationViaKbdInt code.
All versions between 2.9.9 and 3.3 contain a bug in the
ChallengeResponseAuthentication code.
OpenSSH 3.4 and later are not affected.
OpenSSH 3.2 and later prevent privilege escalation if
UsePrivilegeSeparation is enabled in sshd_config. OpenSSH
3.3 enables UsePrivilegeSeparation by default.
Although some earlier versions are not affected upgrading
to OpenSSH 3.4 is recommended, because OpenSSH 3.4 adds
checks for a class of potential bugs.
2. Impact:
This bug can be exploited remotely if
ChallengeResponseAuthentication
is enabled in sshd_config.
Affected are at least systems supporting s/key over
SSH protocol version 2 (OpenBSD, FreeBSD and NetBSD
as well as other systems supporting s/key with SSH).
Exploitablitly of systems using
PAMAuthenticationViaKbdInt
has not been verified.
3. Short-Term Solution:
Disable ChallengeResponseAuthentication in sshd_config.
and
Disable PAMAuthenticationViaKbdInt in sshd_config.
Alternatively you can prevent privilege escalation
if you enable UsePrivilegeSeparation in sshd_config.
4. Solution:
Upgrade to OpenSSH 3.4 or apply the following patches.
5. Credits:
ISS.
Appendix:
"
Where do you see this?
From the advisory from ISS X-Force:
"OpenSSH supports the SKEY and BSD_AUTH authentication options. These are
compile-time options. At least one of these options must be enabled
before the OpenSSH binaries are compiled for the vulnerable condition to
be present. OpenBSD 3.0 and later is distributed with BSD_AUTH enabled.
The SKEY and BSD_AUTH options are not enabled by default in many
distributions. However, if these options are explicitly enabled, that
build of OpenSSH may be vulnerable."
Granted, ISS X-Force is proving to be the bad child in the group, they may once again be inaccurate in their race to get "credit".
No, I'd do both. You need an immediate stop on the employee's behavior (the original poster tried to walk away several times, how would he make it to a phone?). Verbally calling would be the right thing. Pressing the police for assault charges would also be a good thing, gets managements attention that there is a problem.
In short, when presented with two good ideas, do both if possible.
From the situation you describe, your small office is on the road to disaster. Until you can get someone to buy into the fact the computers and network are CRITICAL to the function of the business, you're not going to get anywhere and gain nothing but PAIN.
Backup is just one part of a keeping IT functions online and working. What about user installed software? Virus scanning? Configuration management? Hardware replacement? Just to name a few items. Without support from the heads of the office, forget it.
This all assumes, of course, that the IT functions are in fact critical to the business!!
This is incredibly stupid on "United Linux"'s part. The First Person has to buy the binaries, they then get the source and have the right to redistribute the binaries AND code to whomever. Do they really want just one paying customer? Ooookay!
:)
One wonders if the use of the Trademark Linux by this conglomerate will come under fire.
Show up on a disc golf course with a Frisbee and you might as well stamp "Newbie" on your forehead.
:)
:)
Golf discs are heavier and hurt like hell if you are moronic enough to try to play catch with one.
Not to mention you'll have a hard time throwing Ye Olde Frisbee much over 100 feet. Drives to 350 feet are average for a regular disc golfer. Like me.
Fools like you think Open Source has only to do with being monitarily free.
Let's see, I should switch to OS X because:
1. Some of it is Open Source.
2. I forgot what vendor lock in was all about.
3. I'd rather run Closed Hardware any day.
4. Because Steve Jobs said it was cool.
5. My trust fund says I need to buy new hardware every year or two.
After browsing through the comments, it's obvious why Apple is still in business. Some people like to buy things because they look good and for no other reason.
"Look! It's pretty! Buy one!"
"Oooooh! Here's my wallet!!"
The really stupid part about that is eventually 5 GHz will have the exact same problem. Going to 5 GHz is not a real solution, it's just delaying the impact of the problem.
Imagine a trophy bass on a fishing line.
Now imagine an anchor line between your shorts and you're running full tilt. Did I mention the S hook on the end of the line?
All I remember is suddenly facing the opposite way I was running and this big string attached to my shorts. Yes, ow.
You're a dumbass. There, feel better?
If Merril Lynch set themselves up to ALLOW "some 15 year old KDE contributer" to cause major system damage, then they're to blame. Period. Take your loss and thank you for playing Business.
If I'm in an accident and injured due to a manufacturer defect that is determined to be negligence, you bet your ass the manufacturer is to blame and will pay. Nobody gets a "I screwed up, I get out of Jail Free" card. Yet that's EXACTLY what people are expecting when they talk about "accountability" and Linux.
And before you make some ass comment about sue-happy people, I got my balls ripped open in high school due to an act of negligence and a volleyball net in gym. Could I have sued the school? Yes. Did I? No. I got my 9 stiches and vowed not to run under volleyball nets anymore.
And I quote:
"Even more important, who is accountable?
Linux is an amalgamation of the input of
many companies and individual software
engineers. So whom do you call when it
breaks?"
*gasp* Merril Lynch would be the ones responsible for their own systems. Goodness, we certainly can't have that!
/sarcasm
This argument is so tired. If you're in business and have to worry about whom you can blame if the stuff hits the fan (read YOU SCREW UP), then I'd really prefer you weren't in business. As a customer, I respect a company that owns up to screwing up and making it right. I hold in contempt those that point the finger at someone else.
Ah, you mistake my words. Nowhere did I say I personally was excluded from People. :) Again, People refers to a large group of Persons. Persons can be very smart and intelligent, People are stupid.
As far as "Windows works for me", for every 1 person I talk to who has a handle on their Windows workstation and doesn't complain about the "Reinstall every 3 months" or "Reboot daily or twice on Wednesdays" rules of thumb, there are 30 people that do whine and ask "What's Linux?".
My favorite expression is the 90/10 rule, which I define as this:
"On any given subject, 90% of People are Idiots."
That rule certainly applies to me.
Now, on to the point at hand, am I a Windoze Luser when it comes to other consumer products? I would say I'm not. If I have a problem with a given product, I either:
A) Don't buy/use that product. (Cable TV is going on this list)
B) Modify said product to do what I want. (Hmm, these rails don't quite fit my rack setup. Where's my jigsaw?)
C) Put up and shutup. (I guess gas-driven automobiles fall here)