Linux-Advocacy Digest #481, Volume #26 Fri, 12 May 00 19:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Slashdot is down ("Francis Van Aeken")
Re: German Govt says Microsoft a security risk (Matthias Warkus)
Re: German Govt says Microsoft a security risk (Matthias Warkus)
Re: German Govt says Microsoft a security risk (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Information about the I LOVE YOU bug (patch) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: German Govt says Microsoft a security risk (Salvador Peralta)
Re: Slashdot is down (Dave Sneddon)
Re: Things Linux can't do! ("Red Hat")
Re: Things Linux can't do! (Dave Sneddon)
Re: Things Linux can't do! (Dave Sneddon)
Re: Things Linux can't do! (Dave Sneddon)
Re: Call me Paranoid - Re: What else is hidden in MS code??? (Dave Sneddon)
Re: An honest attempt ("Red Hat")
Re: Newbie loves Linux, but can't get samba to dance...... (Dave Sneddon)
Re: Here is the solution (Timberwoof)
Re: A Blast From Oracle's Past (Re: Is the PC era over?) (Dave Sneddon)
Re: This is Bullsh&^%T!!! (Alan Boyd)
Re: Dvorak calls Microsoft on 'innovation' (Paul Colquhoun)
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software (Paul Colquhoun)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Francis Van Aeken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Slashdot is down
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 18:14:27 -0300
Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I'm sure if they were running ASP under IIS, they wouldn't have those
> same DDOS problems, eh?
One thing that has always intrigued me: www.microsoft.com, which is no
doubt the most attacked site in the world, is NEVER down. They survive
DDOS upon DDOS and do this running MS software. Not bad as a track
record.
Francis.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: German Govt says Microsoft a security risk
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 23:30:59 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Fri, 12 May 2000 12:49:30 GMT...
...and John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gunter Bengel writes:
> > And since this is a tax issue they asked at the relevant authority which
> > is the "Finanzamt" (tax office). The statute of a church was refused to
> > them by said tax office, not by the governement,...
>
> The tax office is not part of the government? Bizarre!
There is a difference between the government that governs a country
and the administration that administrates it. Administration officials
don't change when the government changes (except for the highest ones
which are sent into early retirement).
mawa
--
Brigitte-Leser!
Brillenputzer!
Briefmarkensammler!
Brockhaus-Abonnent!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: German Govt says Microsoft a security risk
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 23:29:41 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Fri, 12 May 2000 10:03:17 -0700...
...and Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > And btw, Scientology's desperate and tasteless propaganda efforts in this
> > > matter seem to underline what critics accuse them of,
>
> What propaganda? The German government apparently won't do business
> with any company that is in any way linked to scientology. That is
> discrimination.
No, that is self-protection, because Scientology's practices clash
with the German constitution.
mawa
--
Brigitte-Leser!
Brillenputzer!
Briefmarkensammler!
Brockhaus-Abonnent!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: German Govt says Microsoft a security risk
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 23:34:21 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Fri, 12 May 2000 18:55:51 GMT...
...and JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 12 May 2000 17:20:13 +0200, Matthias Warkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >It was the Fri, 12 May 2000 00:35:31 GMT...
> >...and Christopher Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >But German politicians have the right to tell their citizens that they
> >> >should not believe in Scientology?
> >>
> >> They appear to regard it as a "cult" rather than as an ordinary
> >> religion. I would tend to agree with that regard.
> >
> >They regard it as a corporation, cloaked as a cult. BTW, it has been
> >decided that the goals of Scientology oppose certain ideas that have
> >been encoded in some constitution (either the federal constitution or
> >a federal state's constitution) and thus, at least in one federal
> >state, Scientology is being observed by constitution protection
> >authorities.
>
> This could be considered consistent with the German practice
> of banning the Nazi party (and wannabes).
Exactly. The same laws apply to all kinds of radicals.
> Will this 'religous defender' also step forward to defend the
> liberties of the Nazis that he alludes to?
Probably not. Which will be a bit schizophrene...
mawa
--
Datensicherer!
Deutschrockhörer!
Diätbiertrinker!
Spitzengeschwindigkeitabregler!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.true-crime
Subject: Re: Information about the I LOVE YOU bug (patch)
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 21:32:39 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Myranya) wrote:
> On Mon, 08 May 2000 16:42:08 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[snip]
> >> But I'm sure that when the next virus is sent out in this way,
> >> they'll all merrily double-click the attachment, no matter how
> >> unlikely the name or topic of the email & file. Duh.
> >
> >Indeed. But the fact remains that when people _are_ so gullible,
> >the companies should take the obvious preventive measures.
> <Snip>
>
> No, it is not the companies' responsibility to protect people
> against themselves. I don't support making everything idiot-proof
> -it doesn't work anyhow, because whenever you make something
> idiot-proof, along comes a bigger idiot. ;)
True, but idiocy, like intellignce, approximates a normal
distribution (or at the very least exhibits a central tendency).
You may safely ignore the tails of the distribution, and say
they are so truly clueless they deserve it, but when a _large_
number are sucked up into the ruse, then I think one -- as a
developer -- _should_ start to worry. And this worm-type approach
has worked enough times that we can say that the rubes are the
rule rather than the exception. Time for Micro$sux to do
something to tailor their product to their consumer profile. ;-)
Cheers,
-- Arne Langsetmo
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: German Govt says Microsoft a security risk
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 14:47:43 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Matthias Warkus wrote:
>
> It was the Fri, 12 May 2000 10:03:17 -0700...
> ...and Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > And btw, Scientology's desperate and tasteless propaganda efforts in this
> > > > matter seem to underline what critics accuse them of,
> >
> > What propaganda? The German government apparently won't do business
> > with any company that is in any way linked to scientology. That is
> > discrimination.
>
> No, that is self-protection, because Scientology's practices clash
> with the German constitution.
How?
--
Salvador Peralta
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.la-online.com
------------------------------
From: Dave Sneddon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Slashdot is down
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 22:47:17 +0100
Francis Van Aeken wrote:
> Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > I'm sure if they were running ASP under IIS, they wouldn't have those
> > same DDOS problems, eh?
>
> One thing that has always intrigued me: www.microsoft.com, which is no
> doubt the most attacked site in the world, is NEVER down. They survive
> DDOS upon DDOS and do this running MS software. Not bad as a track
> record.
>
> Francis.
Perhaps because they know something that they don't tell their customers. Anyway,
Microsoft
used to be appallingly slow until about 6 months ago, probably because they were eating
DogFood 4.0 instead of DogFood 2000 at the time.
------------------------------
From: "Red Hat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 22:53:36 +0100
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Linux is like a statue which has traveled through time.
>
How true!
>
> Linux doesn't require a profit to survive!
>
Linux isn't required to profit. Linux doesn't require to survive.
> Linux just needs humans, a small group of humans, to survive.
>
...and somebody to feed them.
Thank you,
Red.
------------------------------
From: Dave Sneddon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 22:49:58 +0100
ax wrote:
> Is this an "American Dream"?
>
> No mather how much you dislike Bill Gates, he is still your American pride,
> but Linus is not.
That's because Linus is from Finland, and is a national celebrity there.
------------------------------
From: Dave Sneddon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 22:51:43 +0100
"Clifford W. Racz" wrote:
> About the posting:
>
> >Amen, brother.
> >
> >But the sad truth is, that not the best product will be favoured by the
> >consumer, only the best marketet product. And Linux does not have much
>
> This is rubbish. It isn't about marketing. It is that our whole society is
> about fast food, and disposable diapers. Even the piss-poor product that a
> consumer will not have to think about will win over the robust product that
> is much more difficult to use or has a steeper learning curve. Thus Windows
> will continue to sell and Linux will continue to be alrgely ignored.
>
> It's like this (maybe sad, but true):
> IF (Linux = ease for the layperson) THEN (Success) ELSE (Windows wins)
Exactly, so long as Mandrake do it instead of Corel.
------------------------------
From: Dave Sneddon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 22:57:40 +0100
> about 10 developers and 35 lawyers
Isn't this the standard US large corporation ratio. Maybe GNU isn't so
different after all.
------------------------------
From: Dave Sneddon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Call me Paranoid - Re: What else is hidden in MS code???
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 23:02:23 +0100
> We seem to get instant amnesia. The latest estimate is that
> this virus has already cost $10 billion in lost productivity.
>
I find it very hard to believe that figure. I'd love to see how they
worked that one out. Was that a CNN figure? The same CNN that announced
that BMW was selling it's 'luxury' car division Rover. Score one for the
Yurpeen CNN bureaus.
------------------------------
From: "Red Hat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An honest attempt
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 23:06:41 +0100
"abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8fhg5u$v7s$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Clifford W. Racz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Unless a time effective solution can be found for us, you advocates on
> > comp.os.linux.advocacy have failed to convert me. But, hey, at least I only
> > spent $25 to buy a Linux box set (I downloaded Corel for free).
>
> Why do you think that it is anyone's intention on this newsgroup to convert
> *you*?
...
> Give it up before you post again.
...
> If you werent stupid, the documentation would be sufficient for your needs.
...
> If you werent lazy, the documentation would be sufficient for your needs.
...
> Whats dark matter made out of? (at least according to exceedingly recent
> hubble findings)
...
> Because youre stupid and lazy. :P
Thank you. You have successfully failed to convert another one.
Lunie, what is your big arrogance for?
sincerely,
Red.
------------------------------
From: Dave Sneddon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Newbie loves Linux, but can't get samba to dance......
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 23:07:02 +0100
Beware snowball, this forum is full of proper frothing at the mouth Linux
zealots, Microsoft employees, and various fragmented Unix folks.
comp.os.linux.networking has lots of good threads with Samba answers, that's
how I got mine working.
------------------------------
From: Timberwoof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Here is the solution
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 15:04:38 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, dakota
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <nfHS4.615$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik
> Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:8fepfn$7lq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> Can you write a backup domain controller capable of syncing
> >> >> contents with an NT domain controller? Or a replacement
> >> >> primary controller that can sync to a Microsoft backup
> >> >> controller?
> >> >
> >> >That's a protocol, not an API.
> >>
> >> I have the feeling that you are going to reply that anything
> >that
> >> isn't documented isn't an API, but let's take the same issue
> >> from the other direction where it clearly is an API. How do
> >> I, on a client, exchange a password in the NT encrypted mode
> >> using a protocol of my own and a server of my own, and then
> >> make the client consider itself authenticated in the domain?
> >
> >I still don't understand the question. A protocol is not an
> >API. An API is
> >an interface that a program running on a computer can call to
> >get the OS to
> >do something. A protocol is a stream of bytes sent via a
> >network.
>
> Wow, and all these years I thought a stream of bytes transmitted
> via a network was called a PACKET. Is this some
> new "innovative" Microsoft definition? Do you know what you're
> talking about?
A protocol is a set of rules governing the interaction between two or
more processes. For example, network protocols, security protocols,
diplomatic protocols. You can implement a protocol as a set of APIs that
applicaitons can use.
--
Timberwoof
Chief Perpetrator, Infernosoft: Putting the No in Innovation.
(timberwoof at infernosoft dot com -- www dot infernosoft dot com)
------------------------------
From: Dave Sneddon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Blast From Oracle's Past (Re: Is the PC era over?)
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 23:11:38 +0100
JTK wrote:
> David Huet wrote:
> >
> > What a lack of vision. You just don't get it. The network is the computer. It
>may
> > not be the NC or the Palm, but something like this, very powerful, that does away
> > with the excruciatingly complex and buggy OS in a PC, will eventually take over as
> > the appliance for the masses. Come back in ten years and tell me that I was wrong.
> >
>
> Whoah! Look at this guys, a post from ten years ago, telling us how the
> diskless workstation is gonna take over the world! And from none other
> than Oracle itself!
>
> Well, since the ten years have expired, here goes: you were wrong.
> Diskless workstations are as dead as the Dodo, and your boss Larry "The
> Head Kook" Ellison can sink dough into them until his shareholders are
> penniless and they'll STILL be dead.
>
> But I'm curious, o time traveller. Just what was it that you thought
> was going to replace that "excruciatingly complex and buggy OS"?
>
> [snip]
10 years? What are you talking about, the Palm hasn't been around for 10 years, and BTW
don't Citrix produce exactly that type of thing, in use in large banks and small
companies who can't afford to pay for all the things they don't need on NT/2000
Workstation et al.
------------------------------
From: Alan Boyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: This is Bullsh&^%T!!!
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 17:27:54 -0500
Christopher Smith wrote:
>
> "Alan Boyd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Christopher Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > No, it's not. It's the mailer passing the file to shell saying "the
> user
> > > wants to open this, go dow hatever the default action is".
> >
> > Actually it does whatever action is under the
> > "filetype\shell\open\command". In other words, if you change the
> > default to be "Edit", then that's what a double click in Explorer will
> > do. Double click in Outlook and you get a dialog to open or save. If
> > you select open, you get "Open" regardless of what the default is.
>
> No, you don't. If you double click an attachment in Outlook it does
> whatever the deafult action for that filetype is (defined in explorer).
>
> IOW, if you change the default action for .vbs files from "Open" to "Edit",
> double clicking a .vbs file [in Outlook] will open it in notepad.
>
No, sorry, you're wrong. Or at least you are for Outlook 98 and NT 4.
With that combination the default action is executed when you double
click in Explorer. The Open action is executed when you open from
Outlook. Perhaps a different version of Outlook works differently.
Perhaps Win 9x or Win2K work differently. But that's what happens with
Outlook 98 and NT4.
> > A pedantic point, but I thought someone might need to know the
> > difference.
>
> An incorrect point.
No, it's a correct one, I verified it today and that's exactly what
happens. In my opinion, that sucks. If you get used to one action for
a double click in Explorer, Outlook *might* do something different when
you double click the same attachment in an email.
If you want to test, here's the reg entries I used. I created a file
called "junk.qqq" and tested. Both Outlook and Explorer started Calc.
I changed the default to "edit" and then Explorer opened notepad but
outlook still started calc.
REGEDIT4
[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\.qqq]
@="qqqfile"
[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\qqqfile]
[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\qqqfile\shell]
[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\qqqfile\shell\edit]
[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\qqqfile\shell\edit\command]
@="notepad \"%1\""
[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\qqqfile\shell\open]
[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\qqqfile\shell\open\command]
@="calc.exe"
--
"I don't believe in anti-anything. A man has to have a
program; you have to be *for* something, otherwise you
will never get anywhere." -- Harry S Truman
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Colquhoun)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dvorak calls Microsoft on 'innovation'
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 23:14:06 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Gary Connors
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>in article 8etjfd$p1q$[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] at
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 5/5/00 12:42 AM:
>
>
>
>>> I think a variant of Unix running on the VAX -- I don't know if it
>>> was Ultrix, or BSD -- finally figured out that each individual page
>
>Man. Get a clue (I know I'm talking to two authors here). Ultrix runs on
>DEC's. Vax, which was made by digital, ran OpenVMS. Definitly not a Unix.
Just a point, DEC = Digital Equipment Corp = Digital
Vaxen *are* DEC's
Also, a given type of computer can often run several types of operating
system (occasionally at the same time). Just because Vaxen run VMS/OpenVMS
does not stop them also running Ultrix and BSD.
--
Reverend Paul Colquhoun, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Universal Life Church http://andor.dropbear.id.au/~paulcol
-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-
xenaphobia: The fear of being beaten to a pulp by
a leather-clad, New Zealand woman.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Colquhoun)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 23:14:06 GMT
On Fri, 12 May 2000 06:19:17 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
|> > Actually, MS did not test for DR-DOS. Instead, they walked the internal
|> > structures of DOS looking for any variation that would indicate that the
|> > user was not running on MS-DOS or PC-DOS. It just so happens that
|DR-DOS
|> > failed some of those tests (as I'm sure software like FreeDos would).
|>
|> MS tested for OS brand.
|
|How many times do I have to prove you wrong Joseph?
|
|> > The distinction here was not that they tested specifically for DR-DOS,
|but
|> > for anything that was not compliant enough with MS-DOS to have internal
|> > structures act differently. OS/2's VDM was also effected.
|>
|> MS did not check the OS for any missing function or defect - aside from
|> the OS not being a MS brand.
|
|Incorrect.
|
|http://www.ddj.com/articles/1993/9309/9309d/9309d.htm
|
|"the AARD code relies heavily on undocumented DOS functions and data
|structures. The undocumented INT 21h Function 52h is called to get a pointer
|to the DOS internal SysVars structure, popularly known as the "List of
|Lists." SysVars contains pointers to other DOS internal data structures,
|such as the current directory structure (CDS) and system file table (SFT).
|The AARD code checks a number of these pointers in SysVars, ensuring that
|none are null."
So the 'defect' in the non-ms brand DOS clones was that they did not
correctly implement one or more undocumented MS-DOS system calls.
This sounds like a test for non-ms-dos versions to me.
--
Reverend Paul Colquhoun, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Universal Life Church http://andor.dropbear.id.au/~paulcol
-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-
xenaphobia: The fear of being beaten to a pulp by
a leather-clad, New Zealand woman.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
