Linux-Networking Digest #903, Volume #9 Sun, 17 Jan 99 00:13:47 EST
Contents:
Re: port forwarding on localhost (Greg Weeks)
Linux/PPP setup ("Tom Gerrard")
Re: Netgear FA310TX, new tulip.c, still doesn't work (Bob Koss)
Re: This is Linux, not Windows, so why not superior flexibility AND idiot-friendly?
(Alexander Viro)
I want my network card back ! (yongteck)
Re: Linux and Win95 Networking (Paul Sery)
Re: Digiboard PC/Xem cards on Red Hat 5.2 (Somsak Limavongphanee)
Re: This is Linux, not Windows, so why not superior flexibility AND idiot-friendly?
(George Marengo)
Re: Security hole with WU-FTPD (Alan J Rosenthal)
Re: Linksys Ethernet ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: This is Linux, not Windows, so why not superior flexibility AND idiot-friendly?
("w��g")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Greg Weeks)
Subject: Re: port forwarding on localhost
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:35:19 -0600
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Mark L Melville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> i have an ftp server running on a masq'd network... since the ftp server
> does not have an externally addressable ip, i forward a port it.
> however, i'd like to still be able to ftp to the standard port from
> within the network... i've set up inetd to fire up two different ftp
> daemons, one listening on each port, but there's got to be a better
> way... i'd like to be able to forward the external port to the internal
> machine's port 21... i want to do something like this:
>
> ipautofw -A -r [tcp, udp] 127.0.0.1:921 -h 127.0.0.1:21
>
> but that isn't the way ipautofw works. is there some way of forwarding
> localhost:921 to localhost:21 ?
I'm useing ipportfw to do forwarding of ports 25 and 80 from my
firewall to an inside machine. It should work for port 21 for ftp
also, though I haven't tried it.
Greg Weeks
--
http://durendal.tzo.com/greg/
------------------------------
From: "Tom Gerrard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux/PPP setup
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 02:36:15 -0000
I'm trying to get my linux box (at work) to callback to my win98 computer at
home. I'm pretty much a newbie so I don't really know what's going on.
I am running the latest version of mgetty on the (RH5.2) linux box, and have
installed callback. If I telnet to my work machine and tell it to ring my
phone number it does, and I have a connection for a few seconds and then it
dissapears. I have tried every password/settting I can think of and it
still happens.
Does anyone know of a document that will tell me exactly what to do?
TIA
Tom
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Koss)
Subject: Re: Netgear FA310TX, new tulip.c, still doesn't work
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 02:16:37 GMT
Dale Miracle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I am using FA310tx's under slackware I have kernel version 2.0.36 and
>the tulip.c is one that came with it..I didn't have to use the new one
>(the one provided by Netgear) my other slack box is using 2.0.30 which
>needed the new tulip.c . Have you tried using the netgear seperate?
>The memory ranges of the two cards could be conflicting and the 3com is
>winning.
I found my problem -- it was my PCI slot. Nothing I put in there
worked. I went out and bought an ISA card and it works like a charm.
Only 10Mps, but that's still faster than my internet connection.
Bob
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alexander Viro)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.portable,comp.os.linux.powerpc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: This is Linux, not Windows, so why not superior flexibility AND
idiot-friendly?
Date: 16 Jan 1999 23:09:12 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Alexander Viro writes:
>> Damn it, folks, it's getting ridiculuos. *Writing* grep from scratch takes
>> less than week.
>
>Write it in perl and it should take less than a day. Two days if you've
>never used perl before.
In Perl it would take one line and three minutes. But it's kinda
cheating - if you have Perl you are likely to know where to find grep. BTW,
it *is* one of examples in the Perl FAQ. The point being that grep by itself
is simple and could be written on anything that gives sequential IO.
>> Even Windows should provide *that* much.
>
>And when you are done try using it on a Word97 document.
Nah, when somebody sends me such turdlet it bounces to happy sender.
Along with the flame regarding S/N ratio for such things. I consider it
mailbombing - 1Mb for 20K of text means that 980K were plain and simple binary
junk. Sent to my mailbox. 20K of text that went along with them are not an
excuse.
--
"You're one of those condescending Unix computer users!"
"Here's a nickel, kid. Get yourself a better computer" - Dilbert.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (yongteck)
Subject: I want my network card back !
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 02:12:25 GMT
Hi all,
I'm running Red Hat 5.0 and learning Linux. I've always have my
16-bit-ISA ne2000 compatilble card working fine. Last week i've
installed the SB16 module (the sound is fine) But i've lost my network
card. Ive diabled the sound card but at boot up i'm having
"Delaying eth0 initialiazation.."
What and where should i change to initialise the ne2000 card again.
Thanks
Kim
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Sery)
Subject: Re: Linux and Win95 Networking
Date: 17 Jan 1999 01:55:38 GMT
The version of Samba (1.9.17p4) that comes with the book's
Red Hat 5.0 distribution is somewht different than the one
that comes with Red Hat 5.2 (1.9.18p10-3). The newer Samba
uses the default of "workgroup = MYGROUP" in the "smb.conf"
configuration file. The Win95 versions that I have used, and
was described in the book, uses the workgroup name of
"WORKGROUP". I suggest that you modify the smb.conf file to
use the name WORKGROUP and then restart the Samba daemons
(smbd and nmbd). Restart you Win95 computer and you should
be able to browse the Samba server.
The newer Samba also can understand encrypted passwords. If
you happen to be using a version of Win95 that uses encryption
(or you are using Win98/NT) then please look at the
ENCRYPTION.txt file that comes with the Samba distribution. I
also have written up some instructions in the README.samba
file on my web site at: www.swcp.com/~pgsery/LNTK.
I hope that this helps. Please let me know if you still have
problems.
Robert H. Thompson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Hello everyone,
: After checking out this newsgroup for a bit I have decided to take the
: plunge a try networking at home. I have a Linux server running Red Hat
: 5.2 and a Win95 machine. Both machine have Newcom modems and KTI NE2000
: clone NIC along with a 5 port 10BaseT ethernet hub. I have also
: purchased the Linux Networking Toolkit book from IDG books.
: The Linux server setup went along very smoothly but the Win95 machine
: does not recognize the Linux machine as a server. I believe that Samba
: might be the problem. If anyone has any insight on this I would greatly
: appreciate it.
: Yours Truly
: Rob Thompson
: Please send replies to the following:
: work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (8 am to 5 pm EST M - F)
: home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (after 5 pm EST and weekends)
: Thanks ever so much
: Peace
------------------------------
From: Somsak Limavongphanee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Digiboard PC/Xem cards on Red Hat 5.2
Date: 17 Jan 1999 02:58:39 GMT
Chirstian Schlesier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Please help!!
: Here is a copy of an email I've sent Digi about problems
: I'm having running PC/Xem cards on Linux.
: I haven't had any response from them, so I'm hoping
: someone out there can help.
: Here's the saga!!
: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I used to get a very good support from Digi Tech Support last year. They
have a complete home page for software download.
My two digi cards have been working well since then. I have 2 different
model.
One is Digi PC/Xx Driver V1.3.0: PCI/Xrj I/O = 0xff600000.
Try to contact them again or go to their home page.
Somsak
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (George Marengo)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.portable,comp.os.linux.powerpc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: This is Linux, not Windows, so why not superior flexibility AND
idiot-friendly?
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 03:12:11 GMT
On Fri, 15 Jan 1999 18:49:30 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jedi)
wrote:
>On 16 Jan 1999 01:01:57 GMT, Gregory Loren Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>In article <77ofit$h87$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>So true - what you use is what you like. A foreign graduate student here
>>>was all frustrated with windows because he was used to UNIX and coudn't
>>>figure out how to grep in windows.
>>
>>Can you?
>
> Is there anything outside of a ported unix tool
> that does regular expressions in Windows?
Is there some reason why it would matter if it was ported or not?
If the tool is available, what difference does it make?
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.security.unix
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alan J Rosenthal)
Subject: Re: Security hole with WU-FTPD
Date: 16 Jan 99 02:46:34 GMT
Daryle Niedermayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>We had a hacker exploit a weakness in the WU-FTP daemon last night.
...
>By adding an entry to the bottom of the passwd file:
>test::0:0:dummyname:/:/bin/bash
The fact that your /etc/passwd is writable is not a weakness in wu-ftpd.
You mention that /etc/shadow was not writable as if that should have made you
secure; but an intruder can still change their OWN uid to 0 if they can write
to /etc/passwd.
This is not a weakness in wu-ftpd. /etc/passwd lists account information,
including for superusers. If you allow people to write to it, you've given
them superuser privilege. The weakness in your system which was exploited was
the non-root writability of /etc/passwd.
>We are still working to uncover how the hacker managed to append a
>passwd entry to the /etc/passwd file. (I'm open to suggestions--
If /etc/passwd is owned by root and mode 444 or 644, then they had to become
root some other way, or be able to write to /dev/dsk/something, or perform
similar activity which should be (and probably is) root-only. If /etc/passwd
is world-writable, then there's no difficulty.
Most probable without knowing anything further about the situation is that
they got in through one of the well-known network vulnerabilities such as the
imapd bug. This gives you the ability to execute arbitrary commands as root,
such as appending to the password file (or to /etc/shadow, or replacing ftpd
altogether for that matter).
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linksys Ethernet
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 04:09:26 GMT
I've got the "lan" type setup, came with 2 cards, linksys, i got it running no
problem, once i added some stuff to /etc/conf.modules.
drop me a line if u want the specifics.
joe
http://www.oracle-dba.com
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Rich Mycroft" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I spent three days messing with two linksys cards on two different linux
> boxes and finally gave up in disgust and got two intel cards. After that
> both machines came right up. I tried everything I could find on the linksys
> web pages - and one of the cards even had a linux logo on the box it came
> in - but could not get them to behave. In addition my ISP guru claims that
> intel and 3com cards have a much higher net through put. Wouldn't know, but
> at this point linksys has been added to the "don't buy" list.
>
> rich
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message <76nnd4$k2i$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> Anybody have anyexperience getting the Linksys 10M Ethernet card to
> >> work with Linux? I have the Network starter kit (2 10M cards, 1 10M
> >> hub) and the Linksys 3 port 10/100M print server.
> >>
> >> ** REMOVE NOSPAMs IN THE EMAIL ADDRESS TO REPLY VIA EMAIL.
> >>
> >
> >It is NE2000 compatible
> >
> >-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> >http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>
>
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: "w��g" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.portable,comp.os.linux.powerpc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: This is Linux, not Windows, so why not superior flexibility AND
idiot-friendly?
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 21:29:56 -0600
That's a FINE question, Kevin!! Linux was devolved for US, the UNDESERVING
end-users, to be used FREE OF COST if need be. And it DOES get better every
day. I just upgraded from Red Hat 5.1 to 5.2 because the features are
10-fold. I even have sound now!! Sure, I had to put out several duckets to
get a large installation manual and some OK support, but, at worst, if you
don't want to install from an FTP site, then you have to pay linuxmall.com
$1.98 for the distribution OF YOUR CHOICE. What the heck does a person
expect for $1.98? I won't even give you the time of day for $1.98, and yet
this HUGE collaboration of professional software developers is willing to
provide you with an ENTIRE UN*X compatible networking OS for FREE (or next
to it) . I could probably obtain all of the monies required for a full,
updated Linux distribution in 5 minutes on a local street corner and have
more than enough change for a 1/2 case of beer and a pack of ciggies. I
think that all of the people I have heard in the newsgroups talking about
how hard Linux is to deal with compared to Windoze should get off their
butts and develope something that's better, and provide it to me for free.
What, it's not ready yet? Well hurry up, dammit! And a complimentary tape
drive, 10G or larger, would be nice. Oh, and my ma has cancer if you can
help with that, too. She says that $10M will fix her right up.
OK, one final point. If you are going to flame me over my over-opinionated
post, then at least pay me the decency and respect to read this before
pushing "send" --
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude better
than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not
your counsel or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May
your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our
countrymen."
- Samuel Adams
Yes, the quote is from Samuel Adams, they brew my favorite beer, too. But,
the statement is from http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/philosophy.html
That is the URL for the quotation stated above, as supported by the GNU.
Don't know who the GNU is? Then stop posting to this group. If you don't
know who the GNU is, then this message means nothing to you. Just bow down
and beg Mr. Gates not to c*m in your mouth.
I admit, I did miss the first couple of days of this thread, so feel free to
flame me to hell if I've missed the point.
Regards.
Kevin wrote in message ...
---- snip ----
>If Linux is *not* being shot at the "typical" home user, than you are
>quite right, "hard" is not the issue.
>
>I guess my point is, what is the goal of users of the Linux platform,
anyway?
>
>--Kevin
---- snip ----
------------------------------
** 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.networking) 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-Networking Digest
******************************
