Linux-Advocacy Digest #354, Volume #26 Wed, 3 May 00 15:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: What else is hidden in MS code??? (Andres Soolo)
Re: My question has still not been answered.Dance..Dance...Dance... (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Linux NFS is buggy (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Advocay off the Net. (Andres Soolo)
Re: Dvorak calls Microsoft on 'innovation' (Jim Lewis)
Re: Are we equal? ("Edward L. Sandwicheater")
Re: My question has still not been answered.Dance..Dance...Dance... (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Linux NFS is buggy (No Name)
Re: Are we equal? (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Linux NFS is buggy (JEDIDIAH)
Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000 (Arclight)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What else is hidden in MS code???
Date: 3 May 2000 17:12:47 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8ei4mj$9t0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> No, it is not untrue. If reverse engineering violates license, it
>> violates the copyright since the copyright only gives users the
>> permission to use the product by the license. Of course, wherever
[...]
> A copyright does not give you permission to use a product. It prohibits
> non-copyright holders from copying a product.
Actually, a copyright prohibits non-copyright holders from copying the
product except as allowed in the license. I have understood so far
that violating the license contract makes one's use of the product
illegal since he/she hasn't received a copy of the product on the
conditions listed in the license. The obvious exception is license
conditions that are against the law themselves. Well, I might be wrong
on this--IANAL.
>> AFAIR, Rex didn't say Excel 95 needs Direct3D but a 3D subsystem. And
>> that it indeed requires. (I was quite surprised if I discovered it
[...]
> What are you talking about? What 3D package did you "discover"? And how
> did you know it was such?
It wasn't a package. It was a set of DLL-s that came along with the
Microsoft Office.
> Direct3D was bought by Microsoft from a 3rd party in 1996 and wasn't made
> available to the public until 1997.
I believe these specific dll's had nothing to do with Direct3D.
I can't recall which dll's they actually were, sorry. All I remember
is they had `3D' in their descriptions and I guess in their filenames
too, but I'm not very sure about the latter.
Well, I gave up the idea of creating a `mini-MSO' for other reasons
shortly after that, so I didn't research the matter very deeply.
>> > never do.
>> I might give you quite a good (in the sense of checkability) proof
>> of a backdoor planted in MS-DOS (and PC-DOS) to make DR-DOS look bad
>> if you're interested. Just mail me for details.
> First, we're not talking about back doors here. Second, what you are
> talking about is not a back door. Third, it was only in one beta version of
> Windows 3.1, never a production product or a widely distributed product.
No, I'm talking about a back door in MS-DOS and PC-DOS, not the famous
MSW warning message. Check it: take intersvr.exe from any mentioned
MS-DOS version, unpack it (well, they used two different executable
compressors on some tools--the best I can guess is they did it just
to avoid such easy checks since generally two different compressors
applied sequentially don't give better compression rate than any of
them alone--; you might need to download some executable decompressors
(should be freely (gratis, not open source) available on the Web) if
you can't do it under debugger) and look for the string `DR-DOS' near
the end of the result. If you don't mind a little bit of dissassembly,
look deeper into the code. And intersvr is not the only tool that
checks against DR-DOS. I've had that exploding and virtually erasing
a hard disk contents. The actual OS was Caldera OpenDOS, but since
it's a descendant of DR-DOS it identifies itself frequently as DR-DOS.
> Fourth, that doesn't back up anything that Rex has said.
Yes, that specific example doesn't. However, it is a provable example
of an early Microsoft backdoor, so it refutes your claim that nobody
ever proves Microsoft backdoors.
>> > For instance, the claims of MS embedding a GUID in order to violate your
>> > privacy are grossly exagerated. The GUID was there as a way to uniquely
>> > identify documents for indexing, but it was later discovered that since
[...]
>> How do YOU know what's the intended purpose and what's not?
> Because *EVERYONE* was using GUID's for unique ID's at the time.
There's nothing wrong with the idea of globally unique identifiers.
The problem is how they are generated and which data they contain.
Many applications use big random numbers to generate guid's.
Microsoft didn't. Why?
> My company
> was, other companies that I did work for was. It was a common useage, and
> nobody stopped to consider the privacy issues. Yes, it's possible it was
> intended to violate privacy, but Occam's razor would say otherwise.
I'd guess in that case Occam doesn't help. It isn't any simpler to
use MAC address to generate guid's than the hard disk serial number, for
example. I'd say even the contrary: many more machines running MSO
have hard disks than network cards, so even if the ms-guid designer
picked up the first thing he/she came to, it probably wouldn't be the
MAC address. Then again, tracking a specific computer down is much
easier by its MAC address than by its harddisk serial number.
>> > Microsoft
>> > also quickly moved to solve the problem once it was identified.
>> No, once it was published widely.
> Which was pretty shortly after it was identified.
That raises another interesting question: are there any known problems
that Microsoft have fixed after identifying but before publication?
--
Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"All my friends and I are crazy. That's the only thing that keeps us
sane."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: My question has still not been answered.Dance..Dance...Dance...
Date: 3 May 2000 12:30:23 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Again under Win98SE:
>>
>> 1. Internet connection sharing:
>> Try help "how do I share my internet connection?" duhhhhhh
>
> [under RedHat Linux]
>
>Click on the network control panel, click on routing, click on
>
> "Network Packet Forwarding (IPv4)"
>
>Now, how do I do IPv6 forwarding under Windows 98se? :)
This is a typical home network with one dynamic IP address and
thus needs NAT for the other boxes, not normal routing.
Win98se really does get it right for the people who don't
want to know how it works. (Does anyone remember the old
Saturday Night Live commercial spoof where they were serving
'Spud' beer in a mental institution with the slogan: 'Made
from potatos for people who can't tell the difference'?).
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: Linux NFS is buggy
Date: 3 May 2000 12:33:48 -0500
In article <8epbk6$1q4b$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> At this stage we are all quite fed up with this pile of crap you
>> people seem to think is God's gift to the IT industry.
>
>You're not implementing it correctly. Linux is a fine workstation OS, and
>not very good for most other things.
Errr, beg your pardon? There's nothing wrong with it as a web
server, samba server, email server and so on.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Advocay off the Net.
Date: 3 May 2000 17:37:36 GMT
Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Well, I'd suggest we create a website to cast light to the whole matter.
>> There are huge numbers of sites that deal with FUD or with specific pieces
[...]
> Sorry, but my point is that if you created a site like you are
> describing, only the people that already believe what you are saying
> would pay any attention. And all you would end up doing is creating one
> more reason for people to hate us "Linux zealots". This is a fact of
That may be right. Still that doesn't mean it would be pointless to
create such a site. If there weren't people who don't agree what they're
told, we'd still believe the Earth is flat and humans can't fly. :-)
> don't want to hear, you are extremely unpopular. Popularity never
> bothered me much, but I would just as soon put effort into something
> that could be considered productive, rather than go out of my way to
Well, that's right too. However, as my last random sig said,
``if we don't do the things that aren't worth to be done then who does
them?''
> P.S. A person is smart, people are dumb, panicky, stupid animals. (K,
> Men In Black) A more true thing was never said.
The one reading a website is much more frequently a person than a bunch
of people :-)
--
Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Charm is a way of getting the answer "Yes" --
without having asked any clear question.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Lewis)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dvorak calls Microsoft on 'innovation'
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 17:43:45 GMT
"Luke Webber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The Ghost In The Machine wrote in message ...
>[snip]
>>There is none, there. However, innovations abound elsewhere.
>>X (The X Window System, that is, but I'll just call it X
>>for the sake of brevity :-) ), for instance, was "innovated"
>>in the mid-80's; TCP/IP was created in the early to mid-80's
>>by the Woolongong group, IIRC.
>Cripes I hope not! No, TCP/IP originated at Berkely. The Wollongong Group
>just put out a commercial implementation called something like
>Pathway/Access. It always struck me as being very expensive for what it was,
>especially since it sprang out of work done at the University of Wollongong
>(that's an industrial city south of Sydney, BTW).
>[snip]
>>Hardware for Unix has always been a problem. One issue with Unix
>>is that it bangs on hardware very hard (Windows 9x merely taps it
>>more lightly), because of the inherent multitasking/multiuser nature
>>of Unix, and Linux as well.
>Not from where I sit. You can still run Linux comfortably on a 486 with
>16Mb, which can't be said for any modern version of Winblows.
>[snip]
>>It is clear that Microsoft OS provides sufficient value added for
>>the public to purchase it outright. It is *not* clear that the Linux
>>OS provides sufficient value for an *uneducated* public to acquire
>>it for free [*].
>Agreed. Linux admin is simply too much of a black art. Not that Winblows
>admin is always a cakewalk, but Linux, and Unix in general, really does need
>to pull its socks up. A good start might be to begin keeping all those many
>configuration files in one central config directory off /etc rather than
>scattered all over the disk, but a GUI admin tool is really the only answer.
>Even something along the lines of HP's SAM, AIX's SMIT and SCO's SCOADMIN
>would be a huge improvement. And it'd be nice if the effort could be
>translated to a *standard* tool, so we didn't have to treat each version of
>Unix so differently.
>Cheers,
>Luke
I like WEBMIN very much. It has a good interface and access to many
Linux administrative functions. And it's free.
------------------------------
From: "Edward L. Sandwicheater" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.conspiracy,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,talk.politics
Subject: Re: Are we equal?
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 17:47:47 GMT
JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
> On Wed, 03 May 2000 16:29:42 GMT, Edward L. Sandwicheater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> >
> >
> >JEDIDIAH wrote:
> >
> >> >Obviously thats not the case. BTW US gunboats turn back those boats too.
> >>
> >> Calling a Coast Gaurd cutter a 'gunboat' shows your obvious bias
> >> on this issue.
> >>
> >
> >Saying they are not gunboats shows that you havent seen them, they are
> >heavily armed.try looking here on the Coast Guards own Page.
> >http://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-o/g-opl/images/vivianna.jpg
>
> You've got to be kidding.
>
> PT Boats had more firepower than that.
>
> A HMMV with a MK-19 has more firepower than that.
>
> [deletia]
>
> Mebbe to the Cuban Navy this is a 'gunboat'.
>
So youre saying its not a gunboat? Then not only are you wrong, you are
not able to admit you are wrong.
If you cant admit that youre wrong then you have lost the ability to
learn......
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: My question has still not been answered.Dance..Dance...Dance...
Date: 3 May 2000 12:49:43 -0500
In article <8epj7v$97m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>1. Internet connection sharing.
>> >
>> > Compared to the need to download some strange new package,
>> > even bare ipchains commands fare better.
>>
>> No, Win98SE does it out of the box.
>>
>
>Secure????????? <SNICKER> are you claiming that Win98SE is a SECURE
>platform for seting up internet sharing with a fire wall <Roaring Laugh>
>
>Thanks, I needed that!
In typical NAT fashion, it shouldn't expose the private addresses
behind it to any new inbound attack that you didn't already
have with plain old DUN on the gateway machine. If you are
aware of any, please post them.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (No Name)
Subject: Re: Linux NFS is buggy
Date: 3 May 2000 17:37:56 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 03 May 2000 13:39:55 GMT, Full Name said:
>We have an Ultra 10 running Solaris 2.7 with a SCSI DAT Drive. We NFS
>mount the users' files on a second Ultra, a Sparc 10, an old HP UNIX
>box and an old SCO Intel box so they may be tar'd to tape.
>
That you are using tar to make backups shows that you don't have a
clue about proper backup procedures. So don't come here to
pretend you have half an idea because you don't.
>About a month ago we introduced a Linux box (Mandrake 7.x) into the
>equation. What a mistake! The backup stops at random locations
>within the NFS mounted Linux file system. At first we thought the
>tape drive was faulty and dragged a Sun technician out to replace it.
>But the problems still recurred.
There are around 4 ways to do a backup alternative to what you
are trying to do (and of course nobody in his 5 senses would do
what you are doing). What else did you try?
>
>We spent a good fortnight getting NFS on the Linux box to work in the
>first place. Now we find it's buggy.
WOW! That should be a world record. I can do it in 5 minutes.
>
>The irony of this is that we are now looking at using a cron job to
>use Samba to backup the users' files onto the NT box sitting on my
>desk. We are hoping that Samba (unlike NFS) works reliably on Linux.
As I said there are several ways to overcome this, you found
another one, good for you.
>
>At this stage we are all quite fed up with this pile of crap you
>people seem to think is God's gift to the IT industry.
Somebody lacking basic administration skills obviously can't
apriciate the goods and bads of any OS objectively. Linux is not
perfect but is excellent for many applications.
I agree NFS is not perfect, but for your particular problem
there are workarounds that you obviously didi not explore
because you were wasting your time learning how to setup
NFS and trolling here.
>
>No wonder they give the thing away.
>
You can't understand why it is free, any attempt to explain it
to you is futile.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To:
alt.conspiracy,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,talk.politics
Subject: Re: Are we equal?
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 18:19:22 GMT
On Wed, 03 May 2000 17:47:47 GMT, Edward L. Sandwicheater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
>JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 03 May 2000 16:29:42 GMT, Edward L. Sandwicheater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >JEDIDIAH wrote:
>> >
>> >> >Obviously thats not the case. BTW US gunboats turn back those boats too.
>> >>
>> >> Calling a Coast Gaurd cutter a 'gunboat' shows your obvious bias
>> >> on this issue.
>> >>
>> >
>> >Saying they are not gunboats shows that you havent seen them, they are
>> >heavily armed.try looking here on the Coast Guards own Page.
>> >http://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-o/g-opl/images/vivianna.jpg
>>
>> You've got to be kidding.
>>
>> PT Boats had more firepower than that.
>>
>> A HMMV with a MK-19 has more firepower than that.
>>
>> [deletia]
>>
>> Mebbe to the Cuban Navy this is a 'gunboat'.
>>
>
>So youre saying its not a gunboat? Then not only are you wrong, you are
>not able to admit you are wrong.
It's a US Coast Gaurd Cutter, a rather durable large
rescue boat that just happens to have a peashooter at
the end of it.
Calling it a gunboat while perhaps pedantically corrrect
is still rather disingenuous. There are crew served small
arms with more potency then what that Cutter carries.
>If you cant admit that youre wrong then you have lost the ability to
>learn......
No, I just don't have such a small notion of what consitutues
a gunboat. Most navies don't either. To proclaim such a thing
as a gunboat in this context is quite misleading.
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Linux NFS is buggy
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 18:20:50 GMT
On 3 May 2000 12:33:48 -0500, Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <8epbk6$1q4b$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> At this stage we are all quite fed up with this pile of crap you
>>> people seem to think is God's gift to the IT industry.
>>
>>You're not implementing it correctly. Linux is a fine workstation OS, and
>>not very good for most other things.
>
>Errr, beg your pardon? There's nothing wrong with it as a web
>server, samba server, email server and so on.
It's pretty good at Quake3, CivCTP, mpeg decode and video overlay too...
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.lang.basic,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 11:41:24 -0700
Gee, it's funny how few people have that problem. HEH, HEH!
So, either join the "let's make dollar Bill even richer" club,
or, join the "let's screw bill" club.
Craig Kelley wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Arclight) writes:
>
> > On Tue, 2 May 2000 18:26:50 -0700, "Bob May" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Go buy a new copy of Word for Windows 1.0.
> > >Go buy a new copy of Visual Basic 2.0
> > >YOU CAN'T!!!!! All you can buy is the newer versions of the programs
> > >which also cost a lot more than the earlier versions.
> >
> > So? what's wrong with that?
>
> We run Office97.
>
> How do we buy new copies for the new machines (which aren't just
> replacing the old ones).
>
> Either we all have to upgrade to Office2000, or the new machines go
> without...
>
> --
> The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
> Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Arclight)
Crossposted-To: alt.lang.basic,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 19:02:53 GMT
On 03 May 2000 10:56:02 -0600, Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Arclight) writes:
>
>> On Tue, 2 May 2000 18:26:50 -0700, "Bob May" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Go buy a new copy of Word for Windows 1.0.
>> >Go buy a new copy of Visual Basic 2.0
>> >YOU CAN'T!!!!! All you can buy is the newer versions of the programs
>> >which also cost a lot more than the earlier versions.
>>
>> So? what's wrong with that?
>
>We run Office97.
>
>How do we buy new copies for the new machines (which aren't just
>replacing the old ones).
You can still buy Office 97 from lots of places.
>Either we all have to upgrade to Office2000, or the new machines go
>without...
or you could just look in the computer press for somewhere that sells
Office 97.
TTFN
Arclight
Web Site:
http://www.daniel-davies.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
