Linux-Advocacy Digest #154, Volume #26 Sun, 16 Apr 00 08:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Windows 2000 has 63,000 bugs - Win2k.html [0/1] - Win2k.html [0/1] (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: MS caught breaking web sites ("Robert Moir")
Re: backup in Linux (Bastian)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! (Mayor)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! (Gerben Bergman)
Re: Windows is scary all right (Terry Porter)
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Vehical Comparisons (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Windows IS the dominant corporate OS ("Brian D. Smith")
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! (Karel Jansens)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! (Karel Jansens)
Re: MS caught breaking web sites ("Boris")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.redhat
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has 63,000 bugs - Win2k.html [0/1] - Win2k.html [0/1]
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 06:03:36 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On 10 Apr 2000 10:41:56 GMT, James Stevenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >what M$ really need todo is almost scrap the whoel lot and start again
> >and do it properly (they can afford to)
> >
>
> They supposidly did w/ NT. The problem is that their architects are
> morons.
have you ever seen any of their code samples????
Fucking GOTO's all over the place.
I've seen better code written in goddamned BASIC.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: "Robert Moir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.security,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.tcp-ip,alt.conspiracy.area51
Subject: Re: MS caught breaking web sites
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 11:19:38 +0100
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Okay, let's discuss this.
> HOLD IT RIGHT THERE! He's not a FUDSTER for reporting the truth.
> >
> > Latest reports say that there is
> > NO VULNERABILITY IN DVWSSR.DLL
>
> If there's no GD vulnerabiltiy in the .Dll mentioned, then why are
> they telling people to DELETE IT! What are you F'ing saying here!
I'm not saying anything. NTBugtraq are saying there is no backdoor.
> > Yup, that's right, different again from what I said earlier, and even
more
> > different than what I said yesterday to WSJ.
>
> I don't consider WHITE WASH a GOOD ARGUMENT!
Whitewash? You don't know NTBugtraq very well do you?
> Oh for christ sakes! If Microsoft and their policies were less crooked
then
> we would have never had this MESS to begin with.
>
> Your WHITE WASH of the story isn't helping ANYBODY HERE!
What mess? Fudsters printing bullshit? Oh I think we would because if it
wasn't lies about this it would be lies about something else.
> OH crap! Why are they asking people to delete it!
Now that they have established there is no problem, I don't believe they are
asking people to delete this file any longer. I believe this was mooted as a
temporary protective measure while they investigated claims about this DLL
though.
> > That said, understand that sites that allow connections by Front Page
may
> > very well provide you with source asp if you request it. BUT THAT WILL
> > HAPPEN with or without the .dll. Without proper and full permissions
applied
> > across virtual servers on a given box, site leakage or manipulation by
> > others will always be possible in myriad ways.
>
> I'm not going to say it!
What, that they are right? You don't think that it's important to apply
correct permissions to directory structures on webservers?
[...]
> Yes, ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE!
> I'm beginning to believe Microsoft WILL STUP AT NOTHING!
I'm beginning to believe you are mad.
[...]
> This day marks an end to trust between most of the nations internet ready
> companies and the company known as Microsoft.
>
> You WOULD NEVER have had THIS KIND OF PROBLEM if you USED OPEN SOURCE
CODE!
> THIS EXAMPLE is but one of MANY WE COULD SITE HERE TODAY which
functionally
> BURIED the proprietary closed source concept, EXPECIALLY FROM MICROSOFT!
>
> I think you can EXPLAIN until your head falls off.
> By this time NEXT WEEK, nobody in corporate America will trust MICROSOFT
with
> ANYTHING!
Yeah but I don't give a flying fuck whether yanks believe lies or not.
> I'm SHOCKED. Do you hear me! SHOCKED! OUTRAGED!
>
> LIES, LIES and MORE LIES! I'm SICKENED!
> ENOUGH COVERUP ALREADY!
Is there something wrong with you, or has a RANDOM caps LOCK virus sneaked
past your open source review of your system, by the way?
Typing things in BIG LETTERS does not make them true, or any more or less
valid, just more difficult to read.
Rob Moir
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bastian)
Subject: Re: backup in Linux
Date: 16 Apr 2000 10:48:45 GMT
On Sun, 16 Apr 2000 14:39:55 +0800, Jerry Wong wrote:
>I have win98 and Redhat 6.0 in my PC.
>I use the ghost5 to backup my win98.
>Is there any software in Linux that can perform backup the whole linux =
>o/s.
Don't post in html please.
There's a couple of tools to backup your system. Tar and bzip2 (or gzip)
can be used to create compressed archives, and cron times your backups.
If you want to create an image of your linux partition(s), you can use dd.
Bastian
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
From: Mayor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 04:07:44 -0700
In article <ericb-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Eric Bennett
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
>> >But that is a nuisance for the user, who then has to
>> >remember which instance of the program is doing what, and
>> >keep switching between them.
>>
>> A trivial issue. Even if someone has such a poor memory that
>>they can't remember such a simple thing while they're
>>working with it all they have to do is try two more times.
>
>Well, it sounds like more work to me than adjusting an
>application's memory partition size *once*. And we know
>Wintrolls consider that to be an undesirably complicated task.
>
I haven't seen anyone say that. What I have seen is people
pointing out that having to perform that task at all flies in
the face of all of the ease of use claims.
>> I find it very useful to run multiple instances of CAD
>> programs. I can have different preferences set for each
>> instance and switch between them as needed instead of having
>> to change things each time.
>
>How do the different instances know which prefs file they're
>supposed to use? Or do you reset the prefs for each multiple
>instance every time you load it?
Most CAD programs store the preferences used for a drawing
within the drawing file. They have a set of minimal defaults for
new drawings but they are seldom kept. Most CAD users have seed
files with all of their preferred settings that they use as
starting points.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
------------------------------
From: Gerben Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 13:24:30 +0200
On Sun, 16 Apr 2000 06:22:17 GMT, Jack Troughton contributed this to the
collective wisdom of the human race:
| >Heh. An OS/2 user gloating over Windows users' fragile registries. Sure
| >Karel, those OS2.INI and OS2SYS.INI files are rock-solid, aren't they? They
| >*never* get corrupted or polluted, do they? No need for UniMaint, CHECKINI,
| >or any of the other INI-file repair utilities, is there?
|
| Yeah, but it's still way more robust than the registries are.
So OS/2 people keep claiming, but I've used both OS/2 and NT extensively and
haven't found this to be the case.
| And let's face a little reality here; using checkini to fix warp's ini files
| is a hell of a lot easier on the user than using regedit to fix window's
| registry, despite the fact that it's a text mode application.
Ever heard of RegClean? It's a free utility by Microsoft which cleans your
system's registry automatically -- run the program to have it check for
errors, press "Fix Errors" if it finds any, done. Couldn't be easier. :)
--
Gerben Bergman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Windows is scary all right
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 16 Apr 2000 19:26:52 +0800
On Wed, 12 Apr 2000 14:33:46 +1000, craig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Or maybe the largest ISP (and coincidently, always rates as the "best, most
>reliable service" in user surveys) in Australia that is almost exclusively
>NT. I know its not fortune 500, but it is still large to say the least!!!!.
Which ISP is this ?
I hope you don't mean Big Drip ?
>
>There are many others - I just don't have time to dig up URL's
>
>Regards,
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 2 weeks 38 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 11:22:38 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Vlad writes:
> > $4 an hour is standard rate for most of the service industry. You
may get
> > 6 if you are willing to do nightshifts.
>
> If you've got a supply of people who will work for $4 send them to me.
> I'll place them all at $7 and pocket a commission. I have to pay $8
for
> bucking hay.
Your farm must be the best kept secret, as Im sure it would be
flooded by all the mexican migrant workers now working for cents
not dollars if they knew about it.
> > Maybe because its natural for people to help others in need?
>
> Yes, it is. However, people vary in how much help they will give and
who
> they will give it to.
>
> > Once again cooperation not competition.
>
> Competition and cooperation are not opposites.
>
> > If you dont agrre with your boss, he will promptly fire you because
there
> > is a line of people willing to do the job, and not only he will fire
you
> > but also will make sure you never get another job in that area.
>
> You clearly don't live on the same planet I do.
You can say so, I live in a country that only recently adapted
free-market economy which has so far resulted in total diasaster:
such as destruction of the free education and health care system.
The unemplyoment rate is so high that bosses can do anything they
want to their workers.
Vlad.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Vehical Comparisons
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 11:34:23 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, CG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on 15 Apr 2000 11:01:30 EDT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On 13 Apr 2000 00:17:52 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 13 Apr 2000 00:27:42 +0200, Davorin Mestric wrote:
>>>nice try.
>>>
>>>however, most of the people DON'T have problems when running windows that
>>>are not solvable.
>>
>>I don't see how the frequent Win9x crashes I see are "solvable".
>>
>
>that's because in the bizarre world of M$ computing frequent crashes
>are not seen as problems.
On the desktop, they are not as serious a problem as they would be
on a Web, FTP, or other server. Granted, they are problems -- one
could see "my dog ate my homework" getting anachronistic, for
example :-) -- and I for one would hope for a more reliable desktop
in the future, one such as Linux. :-)
However, Microsoft does have some significant value added in
Office 2000. It's quirky, weird, and downright stupid when it
comes to viruses, but the ability to drag a file and drop it in
with an attachment makes it convenient.
I would hope that StarOffice or KDE has similar functionality.
Even Netscape is not quite that convenient. :-)
(This may be one example why being an end-to-end solution -- from
OS to application -- may have advantages. One big disadvantage,
of course, is the potential for abuse -- a potential that
apparently already has been realized.)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- convenience vs. reliability shouldn't *be* a contest :-)
------------------------------
From: "Brian D. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows IS the dominant corporate OS
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 11:35:31 GMT
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=====
Hash: SHA1
Sorry, but I don't find these to be reasonable arguments. It's blind
advocacy of Microsoft without regard to the (lack of) quality. There
is something that Microsoft _IS_ good at: marketing. That's how they
managed to capture 90% of the desktop market over higher quality
(MacOS) competitors.
The server market is another area. Microsoft does have about 38% of
the server market, which remains virtually unchanged from previous
years. Linux, on the otherhand, has doubled its share to 25%. The
reason its making such inroads is not because the OS is free. It's
because of the quality of the OS, and the total cost of ownership.
Microsoft really has never been a contender in the database market
either. In fact, in our environment, our Visual Basic developers are
asking to port their applications from Microsoft Access to Oracle
because of the limitations of the Microsoft database product.
While it doesn't happen all the time, I believe most managers will
make their decisions based on the needs of the business, and that most
often includes a mixed environment. Most new employees already know
the windows desktop, so that's the right business choice for the
desktop (usually). But the right business decision in the server room
is not necessarily Microsoft. It should be a total cost of ownership
decision matching factors of cost, performance, and reliability to the
requirements of the business. Microsoft may end up in there as a file
and print server, but the big iron for database servers and Internet
applications are better suiting (and better performing) on the UNIX
(and these days, Linux) based platforms.
Brian Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Joseph Wong wrote:
>
> Windows will remain the dominant corporate operating system because
it has
> some features/frameworks that would make it easier for enterprise
wide
> computing. For instance, DAO, ADO and COM. These frameworks that to
the best
> of my knowlede only exists on the Windows platform put them at an
advantage
> over the competition. For corporate IT managers what matters most in
an OS
> is not its quality or performance. I wouldn't say that this doesn't
matter,
> but its just not the most important. What is the most important is
whether
> or not its serves your enterprise needs for: database access,
network
> support and distributed computing. ADO and DAO serves the purpose of
making
> database access easy to accomplish in Windows systems. COM is
Microsoft's
> model for interprocess communications and distributed computing. ADO
and DAO
> gives you an extra layer of abstraction when dealing with your
database.
> This means that you don't have to worry that much about lower level
details
> when making a program to manipulate your database. Your data could
be on a
> server in the next room or located in some little known server
somewhere it
> Timbuktu in doesn't matter. You can access your data in the same
fashion.
> Another advantage of DAO and ADO is the standardisation of data
accessing.
> This means similar programs which also uses DAO and ADO can talk to
each
> other via COM. This allows for rapid application development which
also
> matters a lot in the corporate environment. From the above reasons,
I think
> the enthusiasm over Linux and overly optimistic and overhyped.
Microsoft,
> because of its better supporting frameworks and protocols still has
the
> upperhand as far as the big corporate guys are concerned.
>
> Joe
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE=====
Version: PGP 6.0.2
iQA/AwUBOPmlaBUjubvBswzqEQKwXQCguDrQe0Hvw0HAgPeFXjhZsMQ8xSsAoM6V
x4LGsSUYaG3cNY1okmYqVP7/
=mLIJ
=====END PGP SIGNATURE=====
------------------------------
From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Date: 16 Apr 2000 12:44:19 GMT
I've seen both sides of this behaviour.
On the one hand there is Star Office where _everything_ is a
sub-window... and I deeply detest it.
On the other hand I have Applix Office (unfortunately only in Linux)
which seemingly opens another instance of the program for every new
document. However, Applix relies heavily on the shared libraries
philosophy of Linux and will actually not load any new code into
memory for that new instance. If you work in a document-centric
environment, IMHO this is the preferred way to do things. Every
document becomes a separate entity on your desktop; what happens under
the hood is irrelevant.
Then again, the terms "document-centric" and "windows" should only be
used in the same sentence if separated by the word "not".
Unfortunately, I don't know d*ck about the Mac (it's easier to try out
new things if you don't have to buy new hardware first <G>).
Eric Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <cbaK4.42141$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tim Mayer"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > Why would you want it to? Once the OS supports multiple instances, this
> > becomes the ideal solution for this type of problem. Multiple thread
> > share
> > memory and resources with the process, where multiple-processes are
> > completely isolated. Having this isolation is a great advantage when one
> > of
> > them attempts something illegal (GPF).
>
> Maybe your software is a lot less reliable than mine, but the only
> things that I find crash are web browsers and games. I don't know
> anyone who launches multiple instances of Quake, and I would still
> rather have all my web pages open in one instance of a web browser. And
> even browsers don't crash *that* often.
>
> > > I don't deny it makes things easier for the programmer. I just think
> > > that users can appreciate it if programmers go to the extra effort to
> > > make their software able to do multiple things at once. I always hated
> > > the old version of Eudora that wouldn't let me compose new mail while
> > > the software was busy downloading a big attachment... why should I end
> > > up loading two copies of Eudora?
> >
> > Don't confuse multiple instances with multiple threads. Multiple threads
> > enable a single application to do many things at once. Multiple instances
> > allow you to run isolated processes, but each process can still run many
> > threads.
>
> So long as you have multiple threads, why bother with multiple
> instances? I don't buy your stability argument. I don't think the
> minimal return is worth it. When I'm on a Unix box, I could fire up six
> copies of Emacs, but I prefer instead to load my six text files into one
> instance of Emacs and switch between them with the Buffers menu. I
> can't remember Emacs ever crashing on me.
>
>
> > Multiple instances are isolated from each other, a single instance that
> > can
> > do many things at once is not. Say I run Internet Explorer twice, and
> > then
> > spawn 5 other windows from the second copy. If the first instance
> > crashes,
> > it will leave the other instance intact. However, if the second instance
> > crashes, it'll take all 6 windows with it. In the Windows world, this is
> > the
> > big difference. Hence, PMT and memory management allow for multiple
> > instances and improve the reliability of the system.
>
> You'd have to have pretty frequent app crashes to convince me that the
> interface nuisance was worth the stability gain. My software doesn't
> crash that often, and even so, I'd rather reload the three web browser
> windows I lost than spend time switching between apps during the
> majority of the time when the software *isn't* crashing.
>
> This introduces an extra layer of effort. If I have a lot of windows
> open, with a single instance, I go to the program's windows menu and
> select my window. With multiple instances, I have to select the
> instance and then the window. Or it introduces an extra submenu, or if
> all windows system-wide are listed at once I have to scan through more
> windows. I prefer the organization that comes from single instances.
>
> --
> Eric Bennett ( http://www.pobox.com/~ericb/ )
> Cornell University / Chemistry & Chemical Biology
>
> CBS News report on Fort Worth tornado damage:
> "Eight major downtown buildings were severely damaged and 1,000 homes were
> damaged, with 95 uninhabitable. Gov. George W. Bush declared Tarrant County
> a disaster area. Federal Emergency Management Agency workers are expected
> to arrive sometime next week after required paperwork is completed."
Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
========================================================
"Hi! I'm a signature virus.
Pls put me in yr sigline and help me spread."
========================================================
------------------------------
From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Date: 16 Apr 2000 12:44:17 GMT
"Tim Mayer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Actually Windows 98 keyboards have a power key. For legacy support reasons,
> hitting the space bar or a mouse button will have the same affect. However,
> when using the soft power-down mode, just moving the mouse or hitting any
> key will cause it to immediately (< 5 seconds in my experience) return to a
> powered up state.
>
>
Isn't that more a matter for the BIOS? Sure, the O/S needs to support
APM, but it can't do diddely all if the BIOS won't play.
I have a P75 which will power down nicely under OS/2 and a P60 which
at best will blank its monitor in Linux. The latter has no APM in the
BIOS.
Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
========================================================
"You must comply."
========================================================
------------------------------
From: "Boris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.security,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.tcp-ip,alt.conspiracy.area51
Subject: Re: MS caught breaking web sites
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 04:20:52 -0700
Can you post your BS on linux newsgroups. That's were it belongs right. Just fuck off
NT
newsgroups you idiot.
Boris
"wisdom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> WELL WELL WELL!
>
> For all of you butt-bumping suckbuddies of Mr. Bill who have
> been assuring us that there are no network "backdoors" in
> Windows you, along with your evil master, are fucked now.
>
> Microsoft just acknowledged (see attached CBS article) that they
> installed secret code in Windows to sabotage webservers
> by allowing "backdoor" unsecured logins for hackers. The
> code was apparently intended to be used against Netscape
> based on embedded comments in the file.
>
> Microsoft is blaming this on "rogue" programmers, whom
> they are promising to fire.(Now tell me the one about the easter bunny)
>
> The timing of this admission couldn't be better... Just when Judge
> Jackson
> is considering whether Microsoft deserves to be broken up, it turns out
> that
> their market dominance was aided by deliberate sabotage...Hmmmm
>
> Let's all hear a rousing chorus of "Breaking up is hard to do".
>
>
>
>
> Microsoft Acknowledges Hidden File
> Secret Message Was Aimed At Rival
> Manager Will Fire Those Responsible
> No Reports Of Hackers So Far
>
> NEW YORK
> (CBS) Microsoft Corp.
> engineers
> included a secret password in
>
> Internet software that could
> be
> used to gain illegal access
> to
> hundreds of thousands of Web
> sites, The Wall Street
> Journal
> reported Friday.
>
> The rogue computer code was
> discovered in a
> three-year-old
> piece of software by two security experts. Contained
> within the code
> is a derisive comment aimed at a Microsoft rival:
> "Netscape
> engineers are weenies!"
>
> Steve Lipner, who manages Microsoft's
> security-response center,
> described such a backdoor password as "absolutely
> against our
> policy" and a firing offense for the as-yet
> unidentified employees.
>
> There have been no reports of site access through
> the code, but the
> affected software is believed to be used by many Web
> sites.
>
> The file, called "dvwssr.dll" is installed on
> Microsoft's Internet-server
> software with Frontpage 98 extensions. By using the
> so-called
> backdoor, a hacker may be able to gain access to key
> Web site
> management files, which could in turn provide a road
> map to such
> things as customer credit card numbers, the Journal
> reported.
>
> One of the security experts, Russ Cooper, says the
> risk is bigger
> with commercial Internet hosting providers, which
> maintain
> thousands of Web sites for a slew of organizations.
>
> It was apparently programmed by a Microsoft employee
> when
> Netscape and Microsoft were at war over their
> version of an internet
> browser, according to the Journal. Eventually
> American Online Inc.
> acquired Netscape.
>
> The Journal reported that an engineer from Netscape
> called the
> hidden file a "classic engineer rivalry."
>
> Microsoft urged customers to delete the file and
> planned to warn
> customers with an e-mail bulletin and an advisory
> published on its
> corporate Web site.
>
> Copyright 2000 CBS Worldwide Inc. All Rights
> Reserved. This
> material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten,
> or
> redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to
> this report.
>
>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
