[PHP] Re: hello everybody

[Jim Giner]

Just so you know - someone has read your note.  But - I'm not sure if anyone 
understands what you want to learn.  From the sound of things, you need to 
do a lot of reading to learn the basics.  Sorry I couldn't help you. 



-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

[PHP] Re: Hello, I have a question about php array max number

[Jonesy]

On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 10:08:12 -0700, PeterDu wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have an array including 2000 records in database,
>
> but when fetch all of them, why just get 1500 records? 
>
> Does that depend on my computer?

Well, at least you hi-jacked a thread that did not pertain to PHP and 
put it back On Topic!



-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 23:58 +0100, Björn Bartels wrote:
> *rofl*
> 
> damn... i love this list... so much for on- ehmmm off-list posts :p ...

It's not just a list... it's a community :)

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Björn Bartels]

*rofl*

damn... i love this list... so much for on- ehmmm off-list posts :p ...

Am 10.01.2009 um 22:24 schrieb Nathan Rixham:


Daniel Brown wrote:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 16:21, Nathan Rixham   
wrote:

are you three flirting?

   Are you jealous?


*throws snowball too* "shut p"



yeah... wonderful (genesis) concert ;)


when in rome..


YT
BB

[Björn Bartels   ]

[email :  bart...@dragon-projects.de ]
[home  :   http://dragon-projects.de ]
[skype :  bb-drummer ]
[icq   :   283827160 ]

[--- ]

Diese E-Mail könnte vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich geschützte  
Informationen enthalten. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind  
oder diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte  
sofort den Absender und vernichten Sie diese Mail. Das unerlaubte  
Kopieren sowie die unbefugte Weitergabe dieser Mail sind nicht  
gestattet.


This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If  
you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in  
error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail.  
Any unauthorised copying, disclosure or distribution of the material  
in this e-mail is strictly forbidden.


[--- ]










--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Nathan Rixham]

Daniel Brown wrote:

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 16:21, Nathan Rixham  wrote:

are you three flirting?


Are you jealous?



*throws snowball too* "shut p"

when in rome..

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 21:21 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
> Robert Cummings wrote:
> > On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 16:14 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
> >> On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 16:06, Robert Cummings  
> >> wrote:
> >>> Snowball hits sandcastle... promptly melts... washes sandcastle away.
> >>>
> >>> *throws another snowball at you*
> >>>
> >>> I've got LOTS more where they came from.
> >>
> >> *danbrown casts Spell of Awe and attains Level 63 Wizard.
> >> *danbrown turns you into a frog.
> > 
> > *quickly edits the PHP code controlling reality*
> > 
> > Babalicious princess walks up and kisses me reversing the spell.
> > 
> > *throws a snowman at you*
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Rob.
> 
> are you three flirting?

Feeling left out?


-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 16:21, Nathan Rixham  wrote:
>
> are you three flirting?

Are you jealous?

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Nathan Rixham]

Robert Cummings wrote:

On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 16:14 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 16:06, Robert Cummings  wrote:

Snowball hits sandcastle... promptly melts... washes sandcastle away.

*throws another snowball at you*

I've got LOTS more where they came from.


*danbrown casts Spell of Awe and attains Level 63 Wizard.
*danbrown turns you into a frog.


*quickly edits the PHP code controlling reality*

Babalicious princess walks up and kisses me reversing the spell.

*throws a snowman at you*

Cheers,
Rob.


are you three flirting?

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 16:14 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 16:06, Robert Cummings  wrote:
> >
> > Snowball hits sandcastle... promptly melts... washes sandcastle away.
> >
> > *throws another snowball at you*
> >
> > I've got LOTS more where they came from.
> 
> 
> *danbrown casts Spell of Awe and attains Level 63 Wizard.
> *danbrown turns you into a frog.

*quickly edits the PHP code controlling reality*

Babalicious princess walks up and kisses me reversing the spell.

*throws a snowman at you*

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 16:06, Robert Cummings  wrote:
>
> Snowball hits sandcastle... promptly melts... washes sandcastle away.
>
> *throws another snowball at you*
>
> I've got LOTS more where they came from.


*danbrown casts Spell of Awe and attains Level 63 Wizard.
*danbrown turns you into a frog.


-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 16:00 -0500, Paul M Foster wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 03:16:34AM -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 03:10 -0500, Paul M Foster wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 01:57:09AM -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 05:20 +0200, Paul Scott wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:15 -0500, Phpster wrote:
> > > > > > -12C in Toronto
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Meh! 30C - 35C in Cape Town, South Africa almost every day for the 
> > > > > last
> > > > > month. It has been a scorcher this year!
> > > >
> > > > Grumble, grumble... did I mention freshwater falls from the sky and
> > > > forms vertical piles outside my home?
> > > >
> > >
> > > High of 72 degrees in central Florida. Now, where did I put my swimsuit?
> > > ;-}
> > 
> > *throws snowball at you*
> > 
> 
> *ducks behind sand castle* ;-}

Snowball hits sandcastle... promptly melts... washes sandcastle away.

*throws another snowball at you*

I've got LOTS more where they came from.

:D

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Paul M Foster]

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 03:16:34AM -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:

> On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 03:10 -0500, Paul M Foster wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 01:57:09AM -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 05:20 +0200, Paul Scott wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:15 -0500, Phpster wrote:
> > > > > -12C in Toronto
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Meh! 30C - 35C in Cape Town, South Africa almost every day for the last
> > > > month. It has been a scorcher this year!
> > >
> > > Grumble, grumble... did I mention freshwater falls from the sky and
> > > forms vertical piles outside my home?
> > >
> >
> > High of 72 degrees in central Florida. Now, where did I put my swimsuit?
> > ;-}
> 
> *throws snowball at you*
> 

*ducks behind sand castle* ;-}

Paul
-- 
Paul M. Foster

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 03:10 -0500, Paul M Foster wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 01:57:09AM -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 05:20 +0200, Paul Scott wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:15 -0500, Phpster wrote:
> > > > -12C in Toronto
> > > >
> > >
> > > Meh! 30C - 35C in Cape Town, South Africa almost every day for the last
> > > month. It has been a scorcher this year!
> > 
> > Grumble, grumble... did I mention freshwater falls from the sky and
> > forms vertical piles outside my home?
> > 
> 
> High of 72 degrees in central Florida. Now, where did I put my swimsuit?
> ;-}

*throws snowball at you*

:)


-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 02:59 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 01:57, Robert Cummings  wrote:
> >
> > Grumble, grumble... did I mention freshwater falls from the sky and
> > forms vertical piles outside my home?
> 
> You have a camera for a reason, Rob.  Snap a few shots and we'll
> help pick out the next Interjinn logo.  ;-P

How do YOU know I have a camera... is that why I feel like I'm being
watched?

;)

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Paul M Foster]

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 01:57:09AM -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:

> On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 05:20 +0200, Paul Scott wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:15 -0500, Phpster wrote:
> > > -12C in Toronto
> > >
> >
> > Meh! 30C - 35C in Cape Town, South Africa almost every day for the last
> > month. It has been a scorcher this year!
> 
> Grumble, grumble... did I mention freshwater falls from the sky and
> forms vertical piles outside my home?
> 

High of 72 degrees in central Florida. Now, where did I put my swimsuit?
;-}

Paul

-- 
Paul M. Foster

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 01:57, Robert Cummings  wrote:
>
> Grumble, grumble... did I mention freshwater falls from the sky and
> forms vertical piles outside my home?

You have a camera for a reason, Rob.  Snap a few shots and we'll
help pick out the next Interjinn logo.  ;-P

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 05:20 +0200, Paul Scott wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:15 -0500, Phpster wrote:
> > -12C in Toronto
> > 
> 
> Meh! 30C - 35C in Cape Town, South Africa almost every day for the last
> month. It has been a scorcher this year!

Grumble, grumble... did I mention freshwater falls from the sky and
forms vertical piles outside my home?

:)

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Paul Scott]

On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:15 -0500, Phpster wrote:
> -12C in Toronto
> 

Meh! 30C - 35C in Cape Town, South Africa almost every day for the last
month. It has been a scorcher this year!

-- Paul

All Email originating from UWC is covered by disclaimer 
http://www.uwc.ac.za/portal/public/portal_services/disclaimer.htm 

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Phpster]

-12C in Toronto

Greets from sunny Ontario

Bastien

Sent from my iPod

On Jan 9, 2009, at 5:19 PM, Simon J Welsh  wrote:



On 10/01/2009, at 10:21 AM, Daniel Brown wrote:

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 16:16, Robert Cummings  
 wrote:


We're at -13C right now without windchill and this is in Ottawa  
which is

a lot further south than I've lived in the past (Timmins, Sudbury).


  Yeah, no offense, my friend, but you can keep it.  We're a balmy
22F (-5C) right now in Scranton.

  Anyway, back to the whole OS discussion:

  http://xkcd.com/528/



And my elePHPants wonder why they're not allowed to see it.
---
Simon Welsh
Admin of http://simon.geek.nz/

Who said Microsoft never created a bug-free program? The blue screen  
never, ever crashes!


http://www.thinkgeek.com/brain/gimme.cgi?wid=81d520e5e





--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Simon J Welsh]

On 10/01/2009, at 10:21 AM, Daniel Brown wrote:

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 16:16, Robert Cummings   
wrote:


We're at -13C right now without windchill and this is in Ottawa  
which is

a lot further south than I've lived in the past (Timmins, Sudbury).


   Yeah, no offense, my friend, but you can keep it.  We're a balmy
22F (-5C) right now in Scranton.

   Anyway, back to the whole OS discussion:

   http://xkcd.com/528/



And my elePHPants wonder why they're not allowed to see it.
---
Simon Welsh
Admin of http://simon.geek.nz/

Who said Microsoft never created a bug-free program? The blue screen  
never, ever crashes!


http://www.thinkgeek.com/brain/gimme.cgi?wid=81d520e5e





--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 16:16, Robert Cummings  wrote:
>
> We're at -13C right now without windchill and this is in Ottawa which is
> a lot further south than I've lived in the past (Timmins, Sudbury).

Yeah, no offense, my friend, but you can keep it.  We're a balmy
22F (-5C) right now in Scranton.

Anyway, back to the whole OS discussion:

http://xkcd.com/528/

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 15:47 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 15:31, Robert Cummings  wrote:
> >
> > I lived in Scotland for many years... Scottish winters pale in
> > comparison to northern Canadian winters, and these in turn pale in
> > comparison to Siberian winters.
> 
> Yeah, and from the sounds of it, Rob, you guys are about to have a
> hell of a deep-freeze.  We're getting down to the single-digits for
> the high in a few days here in Pennsylvania.  It's the cold front
> that's been hovering over Alaska they've had twenty straight days
> with an ambient temperature - not windchill, actual air temperature -
> of between -20F and -65F (-29C and -54C).
> 
>  but don't worry.  They're getting a heat wave by Monday:
> highs will be about -2F (-19C).

We're at -13C right now without windchill and this is in Ottawa which is
a lot further south than I've lived in the past (Timmins, Sudbury).

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 15:31, Robert Cummings  wrote:
>
> I lived in Scotland for many years... Scottish winters pale in
> comparison to northern Canadian winters, and these in turn pale in
> comparison to Siberian winters.

Yeah, and from the sounds of it, Rob, you guys are about to have a
hell of a deep-freeze.  We're getting down to the single-digits for
the high in a few days here in Pennsylvania.  It's the cold front
that's been hovering over Alaska they've had twenty straight days
with an ambient temperature - not windchill, actual air temperature -
of between -20F and -65F (-29C and -54C).

 but don't worry.  They're getting a heat wave by Monday:
highs will be about -2F (-19C).

http://www.google.com/search?q=Fairbanks%2C+Alaska+weather

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 18:09 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
> Daniel Brown wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:43, Nathan Rixham  wrote:
> >> actually i ran it in a debugger, in an ide, in a virtual machine :p
> > 
> >  in Siberia.
> > 
> 
> scotland in winter; same thing really

I lived in Scotland for many years... Scottish winters pale in
comparison to northern Canadian winters, and these in turn pale in
comparison to Siberian winters.

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Nathan Rixham]

Daniel Brown wrote:

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:43, Nathan Rixham  wrote:

actually i ran it in a debugger, in an ide, in a virtual machine :p


 in Siberia.



scotland in winter; same thing really

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:43, Nathan Rixham  wrote:
>
> actually i ran it in a debugger, in an ide, in a virtual machine :p

 in Siberia.

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Nathan Rixham]

Andrew Ballard wrote:

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Daniel Brown  wrote:

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:34, Andrew Ballard  wrote:

Now... you'd have really freaked out if that had actually worked!  LOL

   Hey, good point, Andrew.

   Nate, you do know that was only pseudo-code, right?  Don't run
that in production!

--



Maybe he only ran it in a virtual machine.   ;-)


actually i ran it in a debugger, in an ide, in a virtual machine :p

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Andrew Ballard]

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Daniel Brown  wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:34, Andrew Ballard  wrote:
>>
>> Now... you'd have really freaked out if that had actually worked!  LOL
>
>Hey, good point, Andrew.
>
>Nate, you do know that was only pseudo-code, right?  Don't run
> that in production!
>
> --
> 

Maybe he only ran it in a virtual machine.   ;-)

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:34, Andrew Ballard  wrote:
>
> Now... you'd have really freaked out if that had actually worked!  LOL

Hey, good point, Andrew.

Nate, you do know that was only pseudo-code, right?  Don't run
that in production!

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:08, Nathan Rixham  wrote:
>
> turns out the official word from php itself is that this list doesn't exist
> *oh nos*
> 
> Warning:  unlink(php-general@lists.php.net) [ href='function.unlink'>function.unlink]: No such file or directory
>
> (or did i run it twice by accident..)

Yeah, coincidentally, I was going to use error suppression, but I
didn't want to hear complaints about how it's bad form.



I think I'm going to print up a T-shirt that says just that.

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Andrew Ballard]

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:08 PM, Nathan Rixham  wrote:
> Daniel Brown wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 11:56, Nathan Rixham  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> a few years ago when I first met my rach (we met online), we'd have
>>> random
>>> conversations stretching several pages on various forums and social site
>>> profiles we had - i'd find it massively amusing to then go in and delete
>>> all
>>> of my replies so the whole thing just looked like her on a mad one - wish
>>> i
>>> could do that with this list sometimes :p
>>>
>>
>>You can.
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>
> turns out the official word from php itself is that this list doesn't exist
> *oh nos*
> 
> Warning:  unlink(php-general@lists.php.net) [ href='function.unlink'>function.unlink]: No such file or directory
>
> (or did i run it twice by accident..)
>
>

Now... you'd have really freaked out if that had actually worked!  LOL

Andrew

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Nathan Rixham]

Daniel Brown wrote:

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 11:56, Nathan Rixham  wrote:
  

a few years ago when I first met my rach (we met online), we'd have random
conversations stretching several pages on various forums and social site
profiles we had - i'd find it massively amusing to then go in and delete all
of my replies so the whole thing just looked like her on a mad one - wish i
could do that with this list sometimes :p



You can.



  
turns out the official word from php itself is that this list doesn't 
exist *oh nos*


Warning:  unlink(php-general@lists.php.net) [href='function.unlink'>function.unlink]: No such file or directory


(or did i run it twice by accident..)


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello - thread on topic or not?

[Daniel Brown]

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 10:40, Robert Cummings  wrote:
>
> Lol, I didn't realize it was off-list or I would have posted it back so
> that others could throw in their opinions or speak their mind if they
> disagreed.

Indeed.  I think, especially with the "regulars" that have been
here for years, that list responses are more timely and productive,
thanks, in part, to the (virtual) atmosphere and somewhat unrestricted
nature of the list.

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 11:56, Nathan Rixham  wrote:
>
> a few years ago when I first met my rach (we met online), we'd have random
> conversations stretching several pages on various forums and social site
> profiles we had - i'd find it massively amusing to then go in and delete all
> of my replies so the whole thing just looked like her on a mad one - wish i
> could do that with this list sometimes :p

You can.



Or, on Windows, drop to a command line and type:

del TheInternet

(On older Windows systems, you'll have to type `del TheInt~1`)

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Nathan Rixham]

Daniel Brown wrote:

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 11:17, Nathan Rixham  wrote:

tedd wrote:

At 7:18 PM + 1/8/09, Nathan Rixham wrote:

if it's a computer thats on, with an os, a keyboard and a network card
connected to the internet it's insecure.

It doesn't even have to be connected to the Internet to be insecure.


hence the mention of a keyboard :p


 and his response to your use of 'and' in your statement.  ;-P



this thread is immense, and in reality i think the whole thing has been 
about peoples use of language, as that's all that's been debated (?) :p


i hereby withdraw my and from this thread; oh and my use of equally 
yesterday.


a few years ago when I first met my rach (we met online), we'd have 
random conversations stretching several pages on various forums and 
social site profiles we had - i'd find it massively amusing to then go 
in and delete all of my replies so the whole thing just looked like her 
on a mad one - wish i could do that with this list sometimes :p



--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 11:17, Nathan Rixham  wrote:
> tedd wrote:
>>
>> At 7:18 PM + 1/8/09, Nathan Rixham wrote:
>>>
>>> if it's a computer thats on, with an os, a keyboard and a network card
>>> connected to the internet it's insecure.
>>
>> It doesn't even have to be connected to the Internet to be insecure.
>>
>
> hence the mention of a keyboard :p

 and his response to your use of 'and' in your statement.  ;-P

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Nathan Rixham]

tedd wrote:

At 7:18 PM + 1/8/09, Nathan Rixham wrote:
if it's a computer thats on, with an os, a keyboard and a network card 
connected to the internet it's insecure.


It doesn't even have to be connected to the Internet to be insecure.

Cheers,

tedd



hence the mention of a keyboard :p

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello - thread on topic or not?

[Robert Cummings]

On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 07:29 -0800, Mattias Thorslund wrote:
> Daniel Brown wrote:
> >> You're right, Mattias.  Not only should every one of those folks
> >> be ashamed of themselves for being involved in that thread - they are
> >> also going to hell for it.
> >>
> >> By comparison, sending a message - especially starting a new
> >> thread - to ask if something is on- or off-topic is worse.
> 
> I was simply wondering. I took my reply to Robert off-list because I 
> felt that the question didn't need to be further discussed on the list. 
> Here's the exchange:
> 
> Robert Cummings wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 02:28 -0800, Mattias Thorslund wrote:
> >   
> >> Robert Cummings wrote:
> >> 
> >>> On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 16:21 -0800, Mattias Thorslund wrote:
> >>>   
> >>>   
>  I thought this was the PHP list, not the OS vs. OS list?
> 
>  Is this type of discussion now considered OK here? I recall people 
>  getting flamed for borderline off-topic posts even, just a few years ago.
>  
>  
> >>> This is PHP general... we talk about PHP and, quite often, generally
> >>> related topics. Security is generally related.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Rob.
> >>>   
> >>>   
> >> OK, I'm happy with that. Was just wondering :-)
> >> 
> >
> > It used to be more strict, but over time, I believe that a fairly common
> > concensus formed that it wasn't necessary to always make the distinction
> > because so many technologies come into focus while developing in PHP. As
> > a result topics often veer into less than straight PHP discussions but
> > many readers are happy to broaden their knowledge via such sidetracks.
> > Since the off-topic question comes up quite seldom, I imagine most
> > readers are happy with the current status quo.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Rob.
> >   
> 
> I hope that settles the issue for everyone concerned.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Mattias
> 
> PS. Note this is off-list as well, just to keep this chatter from the 
> list. I don't mind any of it being shared on the list, if anyone thinks 
> it is interesting...I don't.

Lol, I didn't realize it was off-list or I would have posted it back so
that others could throw in their opinions or speak their mind if they
disagreed.

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Andrew Ballard]

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 9:54 AM, tedd  wrote:
> At 7:18 PM + 1/8/09, Nathan Rixham wrote:
>>
>> if it's a computer thats on, with an os, a keyboard and a network card
>> connected to the internet it's insecure.
>
> It doesn't even have to be connected to the Internet to be insecure.
>
> Cheers,
>
> tedd
>

Nope. It just has to accept instructions.

Andrew

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[tedd]

At 7:18 PM + 1/8/09, Nathan Rixham wrote:
if it's a computer thats on, with an os, a keyboard and a network 
card connected to the internet it's insecure.


It doesn't even have to be connected to the Internet to be insecure.

Cheers,

tedd

--
---
http://sperling.com  http://ancientstones.com  http://earthstones.com

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[tedd]

At 1:03 PM -0600 1/8/09, Skip Evans wrote:
Incidentally, I think building their OS on FreeBSD was about the 
smartest thing the Apple/Mac people ever did.


Skip


There are bright people at Apple, like Jobs -- exceptional individual.

Compare Job's presentations to Gates' and you have examples of "what 
to do" and "what not to do". There's even a book called "Presentation 
Zen" that makes that comparison.




Exceptional book, BTW.

Cheers,

tedd
--
---
http://sperling.com  http://ancientstones.com  http://earthstones.com

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[tedd]

At 1:39 PM -0500 1/8/09, Robert Cummings wrote:

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 13:13 -0500, tedd wrote:

 > It's always a safe bet to move towards the center of the herd.

Bah, sheeple! I like to stay away from the herd.

Cheers,
Rob.


I'm sure the feeling is mutual.

A better mouthwash perhaps. :-)

Cheers,

tedd

--
---
http://sperling.com  http://ancientstones.com  http://earthstones.com

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello - thread on topic or not?

[Robert Cummings]

On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 12:59 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
> Daniel Brown wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 19:21, Mattias Thorslund  
> > wrote:
> >> I thought this was the PHP list, not the OS vs. OS list?
> >>
> >> Is this type of discussion now considered OK here? I recall people getting
> >> flamed for borderline off-topic posts even, just a few years ago.
> > 
> > You're right, Mattias.  Not only should every one of those folks
> > be ashamed of themselves for being involved in that thread - they are
> > also going to hell for it.
> > 
> > By comparison, sending a message - especially starting a new
> > thread - to ask if something is on- or off-topic is worse.
> > 
> 
> rob cummings started it
> :D

"Not I", said the fly!
"Maybe you", spoke the poo.

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello - thread on topic or not?

[Eric Butera]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 7:21 PM, Mattias Thorslund  wrote:
> I thought this was the PHP list, not the OS vs. OS list?
>
> Is this type of discussion now considered OK here? I recall people getting
> flamed for borderline off-topic posts even, just a few years ago.
>
> Mattias

:(

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello - thread on topic or not?

[Nathan Rixham]

Daniel Brown wrote:

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 19:21, Mattias Thorslund  wrote:

I thought this was the PHP list, not the OS vs. OS list?

Is this type of discussion now considered OK here? I recall people getting
flamed for borderline off-topic posts even, just a few years ago.


You're right, Mattias.  Not only should every one of those folks
be ashamed of themselves for being involved in that thread - they are
also going to hell for it.

By comparison, sending a message - especially starting a new
thread - to ask if something is on- or off-topic is worse.



rob cummings started it

:D

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello - thread on topic or not?

[Daniel Brown]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 19:21, Mattias Thorslund  wrote:
> I thought this was the PHP list, not the OS vs. OS list?
>
> Is this type of discussion now considered OK here? I recall people getting
> flamed for borderline off-topic posts even, just a few years ago.

You're right, Mattias.  Not only should every one of those folks
be ashamed of themselves for being involved in that thread - they are
also going to hell for it.

By comparison, sending a message - especially starting a new
thread - to ask if something is on- or off-topic is worse.

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello - thread on topic or not?

[Jason Pruim]

On Jan 9, 2009, at 2:06 AM, Robert Cummings wrote:


On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 16:21 -0800, Mattias Thorslund wrote:

I thought this was the PHP list, not the OS vs. OS list?

Is this type of discussion now considered OK here? I recall people
getting flamed for borderline off-topic posts even, just a few  
years ago.


This is PHP general... we talk about PHP and, quite often, generally
related topics. Security is generally related.


And it has been a very interesting read :) For someone with no formal  
training on computers in general, or computer security, it's nice to  
see a discussion that isn't based off of OS Wars :)




--
Jason Pruim
japr...@raoset.com
616.399.2355

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Jason Pruim]

On Jan 9, 2009, at 1:55 AM, Robert Cummings wrote:


On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 22:38 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:

Skip Evans wrote:

Nathan Rixham wrote:



yup.. all OS's are equally insecure; each OS is as insecure as the
next; no
one OS is more insecure than any other



Wrong, and there is experimental data to prove it. Read the first  
URL

I posted that documents the creation of Linux viruses and the
experiments conducted to see how they propagate compared to Windows
viruses.



think about it for a minute; an OS can either be secure (0
vulnerabilities) or insecure (1 or more vulnerabilities); as all OS's
have 1 or more vulnerabilities they are all equally insecure; because
they are all insecure.

the only way to change the balance is to make or find an OS with 0
vunerabilities; thus making it secure and no longer equal.

my worlds boolean.


You've just given the description for whether a machine has an exploit
or not. Not whether said exploit can realistically be executed. By  
your

definition there is no such thing as security since as time approaches
infinity all passwords can be found via brute force and thus all  
systems

are exploitable. That's not a reasonable answer given the time and
resources necessary to achieve the desired outcome.


Maybe the proper way to say it, is the OS is as secure as the idiot  
who runs it? :) For someone who knows what they are doing... I  
believe you can lock down windows relatively easy after you go  
through the 50 pop-ups it takes to move an icon off the desktop :)


Although as far as virii goes... You really don't hear anything and  
any virus' for *Nix based systems, including Apple's OS X... Not that  
it can't be done... I just think it's harder :)




--
Jason Pruim
japr...@raoset.com
616.399.2355

Re: [PHP] Re: hello - thread on topic or not?

[Robert Cummings]

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 16:21 -0800, Mattias Thorslund wrote:
> I thought this was the PHP list, not the OS vs. OS list?
> 
> Is this type of discussion now considered OK here? I recall people 
> getting flamed for borderline off-topic posts even, just a few years ago.

This is PHP general... we talk about PHP and, quite often, generally
related topics. Security is generally related.

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 23:28 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
> Skip Evans wrote:
> > Ashley Sheridan wrote:
> >>> think about it for a minute; an OS can either be secure (0 
> >>> vulnerabilities) or insecure (1 or more vulnerabilities); as all OS's 
> >>> have 1 or more vulnerabilities they are all equally insecure; because 
> >>> they are all insecure.
> >>>
> > 
> > What you are saying, in real world terms, not your Binaryland, is that 
> > if OS A has 2 vulnerabilities that not many people now about, and OS B 
> > has a whole slew of the posted all over the web that they are both 
> > equally insecure.
> 
> exactly; they are both insecure, one is not "more insecure" or 
> "insecurer" - if you make a web app it's either secure or insecure; if 
> you make an operating system it is secure or insecure. On the flip side 
> as an OS owner, a single barely known vulnerability is just as much a 
> worry as 100 well known vulnerabilities.

No, this is not a proper comparison. If I have an insecure web app that
alllows someone to see another user's real name, and another insecure
web app that allows execution of root commands... then I have differing
levels of insecurity.

Thank you, please try again.

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 22:38 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
> Skip Evans wrote:
> > Nathan Rixham wrote:
> >>>
> >> yup.. all OS's are equally insecure; each OS is as insecure as the 
> >> next; no
> >> one OS is more insecure than any other
> >>
> >
> > Wrong, and there is experimental data to prove it. Read the first URL 
> > I posted that documents the creation of Linux viruses and the 
> > experiments conducted to see how they propagate compared to Windows 
> > viruses.
> >
> >
> think about it for a minute; an OS can either be secure (0 
> vulnerabilities) or insecure (1 or more vulnerabilities); as all OS's 
> have 1 or more vulnerabilities they are all equally insecure; because 
> they are all insecure.
> 
> the only way to change the balance is to make or find an OS with 0 
> vunerabilities; thus making it secure and no longer equal.
> 
> my worlds boolean.

You've just given the description for whether a machine has an exploit
or not. Not whether said exploit can realistically be executed. By your
definition there is no such thing as security since as time approaches
infinity all passwords can be found via brute force and thus all systems
are exploitable. That's not a reasonable answer given the time and
resources necessary to achieve the desired outcome.

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello - thread on topic or not?

[Mattias Thorslund]

I thought this was the PHP list, not the OS vs. OS list?

Is this type of discussion now considered OK here? I recall people 
getting flamed for borderline off-topic posts even, just a few years ago.


Mattias


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 18:07, Nathan Rixham  wrote:
>
> Linux Kernel 2.6.x
> 161 Secunia advisories
> 286 Vulnerabilities
> Unpatched: 6% (10 of 161 Secunia advisories)
> http://secunia.com/advisories/product/2719/
>
> Vista:
> 51 Secunia advisories
> 80 Vulnerabilities
> Unpatched: 12% (6 of 51 Secunia advisories)
> http://secunia.com/advisories/product/13223/

This again comes down to shelf life, but still, here's a metaphor:

A maximum security prison has 236 windows, while a juvenile
detention center has 180.  In a ten-year stretch, both facilities have
the exact same number of inmates.  During that period, the prison has
had 14 breakout attempts - 3 of which were successful, and one of
which was caught immediately upon escape and re-jailed.  The detention
center, on the other hand, has had 14 attempts, six of which were
successful, and none were immediately caught and re-jailed.

The point: the number of holes doesn't necessarily make something
less secure; it's the reactions of those responsible that can help
minimize the damages.

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 15:01, Ashley Sheridan  wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 10:10 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
>> Linux is just as susceptible to
>> viruses, worms, and other malware
> I'd beg to differ. While it may be susceptible, I think it is far less
> so, just because of the security it has from the off. And also, the type
> of people who tend to use Linux do often tend to be more technical who
> are less prone to certain methods of virus attack.

Correct --- which comes down to the operator and the potential the
software offers, not the software itself.  If a user leaves everything
as its default setting, vulnerabilities and exploits will be found,
which reclassifies a "secure" system as an "insecure" system.

*NIX systems can be patched and re-patched but changing
nothing, keeping it as it original was off the shelf (as was the
broad-scope case with Windows until recently) creates an equality in
insecurity.

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:44, Robert Cummings  wrote:
>
> I haven't made any claims. I've merely stated beliefs/opinion. You made
> claims, thus the onus is on you to provide proof of said claims.

While I really wish you wouldn't talk about my onus in public like
that, I am of the opinion that I've given basis and proof of that
claim already.

Restating: By design, *NIX systems have historically had (and
still do have) the *potential* to be more secure than Windows.  That's
completely different than stating they *are* more secure.  Likewise,
they have the potential to be less secure.  It's the degree of control
one has over the operating system on *NIX-like systems as opposed to
the lack thereof with Windows.  What is a blessing can also be a curse
in the wrong hands.


For the plain sake of debate (keep in mind, I'm far, far from
being a Microsoft supporter, but I'll play devil's advocate
nonetheless):


Point #1: A TRS-80 could be judged as being "more secure" than a
modern system running the most recent stable of BSD (known for its
potential for security).

So why, in 30 years, have we developed systems that are more
insecure?  Because there are less points of potential failure.  The
TRS-80 used DOS (multiple flavors, if memory serves, which could be
loosely-compared to today's abundance of *NIX variants) as an
operating system.  There weren't all of the bells and whistles that
one now considers standard in operating systems - many of which have
multiple points of potential failure within them, introducing new
dimensions of potential exploitation, and magnifying the risk.


Point #2: The egregious tendency to use the term "operating
system" generically.

The very core of what is considered to be an operating system
comes down to the kernel.  By design at the time of distribution, I
wholeheartedly agree that *NIX is more secure than Windows.  However,
without trying to like I'm playing the semantics game, that is *not*
the operating system.  An operating system is a collection of software
used to create an infrastructure responsible for interaction and
automation of computer system activities as an interface to the
hardware (though I'm sure Wikipedia probably has a better definition).
 The more software involved, the more risk introduced - thus, the less
secure an operating system becomes.  Thankfully, by design, *NIX-like
systems are modular; Microsoft should eventually begin to take note of
this as something for the "plus" or "pro" column instead of just
trying to dominate their environment by embedding everything they can
into the installation.


Point #3: Expansion on the definition of "security."

File permissions are far from the definition of computer security
(not that anyone has argued that, but since it's been brought up).
They are a component of, but do not encompass, computer security as a
whole.  "Computer security" itself is a concept, and one in which the
definition cannot be black and white across the board.  Rather, it's
an applied science in itself - subcategorized within the already
"subcategorical" computer science division of mathematics, etc.


Point #4: Patches and updates do not constitute software security.

Patches and updates are a response to flaws - the software was
insecure, had bugs, or ways were found to improve the overall
experience.  Microsoft is relatively new to the idea of regular
delivery of patches (i.e. - "Patch Tuesday"), and I believe that the
statistics will eventually show a significant decline in widespread
incidents.  It doesn't mean that these incidents will cease to occur,
nor that reporting will be skewed, but rather that response to these
incidents will be improved.


Point #5: The open source motto: release early, release often.

A serious problem with system security: version stagnation.
Windows XP sat for roughly five years while Microsoft worked on the
improved "Vista" version (almost the same amount of time it took me to
make up my mind as to which word in that sentence belonged in
"quotes").  With two (just say it: pathetic) attempts at patching and
solving all problems (both Service Pack releases) during that time,
it's no wonder vulnerabilities were exploited.  Still, does that prove
that Windows itself is less secure than a *NIX system?  Not really; it
means the team responsible for ensuring the ongoing security of the
product dropped the ball, and dropped it hard.  On the opposite end,
open source developers with the *NIX projects not only work every
single day, but vendors send out usually one new major release each
year.  The longer a release sits on store shelves, the more Bad
News[tm] is going to be sent to press about it.


Point #6: Security means protecting from accidents as well.

One of my big points of argument with folks on the subject is that
the definition of "computer security" should also cover unintentional
user-caused consequences - also known as "accidents."  Windows

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Skip Evans]

Nathan Rixham wrote:
Or, for another analogy, you're saying that because all cars can 
either be sitting still or moving then they are all equally fast.




no, more like your car has a window missing, another car has no locks, 
and mine has no door; which is the most insecure?




The one parked in a bad neighborhood.


--
===
Skip Evans
Big Sky Penguin, LLC
503 S Baldwin Street
Madison, Wisconsin 53703
608.250.2720
http://bigskypenguin.com

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Nathan Rixham]

Skip Evans wrote:

Ashley Sheridan wrote:
think about it for a minute; an OS can either be secure (0 
vulnerabilities) or insecure (1 or more vulnerabilities); as all OS's 
have 1 or more vulnerabilities they are all equally insecure; because 
they are all insecure.




What you are saying, in real world terms, not your Binaryland, is that 
if OS A has 2 vulnerabilities that not many people now about, and OS B 
has a whole slew of the posted all over the web that they are both 
equally insecure.


exactly; they are both insecure, one is not "more insecure" or 
"insecurer" - if you make a web app it's either secure or insecure; if 
you make an operating system it is secure or insecure. On the flip side 
as an OS owner, a single barely known vulnerability is just as much a 
worry as 100 well known vulnerabilities.




Or, for another analogy, you're saying that because all cars can either 
be sitting still or moving then they are all equally fast.




no, more like your car has a window missing, another car has no locks, 
and mine has no door; which is the most insecure?



--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Nathan Rixham]

Ashley Sheridan wrote:

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 22:38 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:

Skip Evans wrote:

Nathan Rixham wrote:
yup.. all OS's are equally insecure; each OS is as insecure as the 
next; no

one OS is more insecure than any other

Wrong, and there is experimental data to prove it. Read the first URL 
I posted that documents the creation of Linux viruses and the 
experiments conducted to see how they propagate compared to Windows 
viruses.



think about it for a minute; an OS can either be secure (0 
vulnerabilities) or insecure (1 or more vulnerabilities); as all OS's 
have 1 or more vulnerabilities they are all equally insecure; because 
they are all insecure.


the only way to change the balance is to make or find an OS with 0 
vunerabilities; thus making it secure and no longer equal.


my worlds boolean.


That's like saying a nuke is as bad as a bullet; they can either kill or
not kill. It's not a black and white issue. You really need to look at
the potential vulnerabilities, and then compare patch frequencies. I
think you'll find Windows is less secure.


Ash
www.ashleysheridan.co.uk



Linux Kernel 2.6.x
161 Secunia advisories
286 Vulnerabilities
Unpatched: 6% (10 of 161 Secunia advisories)
http://secunia.com/advisories/product/2719/

Vista:
51 Secunia advisories
80 Vulnerabilities
Unpatched: 12% (6 of 51 Secunia advisories)
http://secunia.com/advisories/product/13223/


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Skip Evans]

Ashley Sheridan wrote:
think about it for a minute; an OS can either be secure (0 
vulnerabilities) or insecure (1 or more vulnerabilities); as all OS's 
have 1 or more vulnerabilities they are all equally insecure; because 
they are all insecure.




What you are saying, in real world terms, not your Binaryland, is that 
if OS A has 2 vulnerabilities that not many people now about, and OS B 
has a whole slew of the posted all over the web that they are both 
equally insecure.


Or, for another analogy, you're saying that because all cars can either 
be sitting still or moving then they are all equally fast.



--
===
Skip Evans
Big Sky Penguin, LLC
503 S Baldwin Street
Madison, Wisconsin 53703
608.250.2720
http://bigskypenguin.com

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Ashley Sheridan]

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 22:38 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
> Skip Evans wrote:
> > Nathan Rixham wrote:
> >>>
> >> yup.. all OS's are equally insecure; each OS is as insecure as the 
> >> next; no
> >> one OS is more insecure than any other
> >>
> >
> > Wrong, and there is experimental data to prove it. Read the first URL 
> > I posted that documents the creation of Linux viruses and the 
> > experiments conducted to see how they propagate compared to Windows 
> > viruses.
> >
> >
> think about it for a minute; an OS can either be secure (0 
> vulnerabilities) or insecure (1 or more vulnerabilities); as all OS's 
> have 1 or more vulnerabilities they are all equally insecure; because 
> they are all insecure.
> 
> the only way to change the balance is to make or find an OS with 0 
> vunerabilities; thus making it secure and no longer equal.
> 
> my worlds boolean.
> 
That's like saying a nuke is as bad as a bullet; they can either kill or
not kill. It's not a black and white issue. You really need to look at
the potential vulnerabilities, and then compare patch frequencies. I
think you'll find Windows is less secure.


Ash
www.ashleysheridan.co.uk


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Nathan Rixham]

Skip Evans wrote:

Nathan Rixham wrote:


yup.. all OS's are equally insecure; each OS is as insecure as the 
next; no

one OS is more insecure than any other



Wrong, and there is experimental data to prove it. Read the first URL 
I posted that documents the creation of Linux viruses and the 
experiments conducted to see how they propagate compared to Windows 
viruses.



think about it for a minute; an OS can either be secure (0 
vulnerabilities) or insecure (1 or more vulnerabilities); as all OS's 
have 1 or more vulnerabilities they are all equally insecure; because 
they are all insecure.


the only way to change the balance is to make or find an OS with 0 
vunerabilities; thus making it secure and no longer equal.


my worlds boolean.

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Jay Moore]

Ashley Sheridan wrote:

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 16:40 -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:46 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:

Robert Cummings wrote:

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:18 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
  

Daniel Brown wrote:


On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:34, Robert Cummings  wrote:
  

He didn't say it had no insecurities... he said it's hard to believe
it's "JUST AS insecure". Please provide factual sources to indicate the
validity of your statement.


Counter: please provide factual sources that it's not, whilst
keeping in mind the statements made elsewhere in this thread.

  
if it's a computer thats on, with an os, a keyboard and a network card 
connected to the internet it's insecure.


We're not debating whether it is or is not insecure... we're debating
comparitive insecurity in relation to that of Windows.

Cheers,
Rob.
  
that's my point, all OS's are equally insecure, the only thing debatable 
is which os has more people trying to exploit those insecurities (and 
the answer is obviously windows)

Equally? Have you looked in a dictionary to see what the word "equal"
means?

Cheers,
Rob.
--
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP



He just forgot to add "for variable meanings of the word equal" ;)


Ash
www.ashleysheridan.co.uk




while (= != =)
{
define(=, !=)
}



(That hurts just to look at.)

Jay

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Nathan Rixham]

2009/1/8 Robert Cummings 

> On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:46 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
> > Robert Cummings wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:18 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
> > >
> > >> Daniel Brown wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:34, Robert Cummings 
> wrote:
> > >>>
> >  He didn't say it had no insecurities... he said it's hard to believe
> >  it's "JUST AS insecure". Please provide factual sources to indicate
> the
> >  validity of your statement.
> > 
> > >>> Counter: please provide factual sources that it's not, whilst
> > >>> keeping in mind the statements made elsewhere in this thread.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >> if it's a computer thats on, with an os, a keyboard and a network card
> > >> connected to the internet it's insecure.
> > >>
> > >
> > > We're not debating whether it is or is not insecure... we're debating
> > > comparitive insecurity in relation to that of Windows.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Rob.
> > >
> > that's my point, all OS's are equally insecure, the only thing debatable
> > is which os has more people trying to exploit those insecurities (and
> > the answer is obviously windows)
>
> Equally? Have you looked in a dictionary to see what the word "equal"
> means?
>
> Cheers,
> Rob.
> --
> http://www.interjinn.com
> Application and Templating Framework for PHP
>
>
yup.. all OS's are equally insecure; each OS is as insecure as the next; no
one OS is more insecure than any other

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Ashley Sheridan]

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 16:40 -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:46 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
> > Robert Cummings wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:18 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
> > >   
> > >> Daniel Brown wrote:
> > >> 
> > >>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:34, Robert Cummings  
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>   
> >  He didn't say it had no insecurities... he said it's hard to believe
> >  it's "JUST AS insecure". Please provide factual sources to indicate the
> >  validity of your statement.
> >  
> > >>> Counter: please provide factual sources that it's not, whilst
> > >>> keeping in mind the statements made elsewhere in this thread.
> > >>>
> > >>>   
> > >> if it's a computer thats on, with an os, a keyboard and a network card 
> > >> connected to the internet it's insecure.
> > >> 
> > >
> > > We're not debating whether it is or is not insecure... we're debating
> > > comparitive insecurity in relation to that of Windows.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Rob.
> > >   
> > that's my point, all OS's are equally insecure, the only thing debatable 
> > is which os has more people trying to exploit those insecurities (and 
> > the answer is obviously windows)
> 
> Equally? Have you looked in a dictionary to see what the word "equal"
> means?
> 
> Cheers,
> Rob.
> -- 
> http://www.interjinn.com
> Application and Templating Framework for PHP
> 
> 
He just forgot to add "for variable meanings of the word equal" ;)


Ash
www.ashleysheridan.co.uk


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:46 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
> Robert Cummings wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:18 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
> >   
> >> Daniel Brown wrote:
> >> 
> >>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:34, Robert Cummings  
> >>> wrote:
> >>>   
>  He didn't say it had no insecurities... he said it's hard to believe
>  it's "JUST AS insecure". Please provide factual sources to indicate the
>  validity of your statement.
>  
> >>> Counter: please provide factual sources that it's not, whilst
> >>> keeping in mind the statements made elsewhere in this thread.
> >>>
> >>>   
> >> if it's a computer thats on, with an os, a keyboard and a network card 
> >> connected to the internet it's insecure.
> >> 
> >
> > We're not debating whether it is or is not insecure... we're debating
> > comparitive insecurity in relation to that of Windows.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Rob.
> >   
> that's my point, all OS's are equally insecure, the only thing debatable 
> is which os has more people trying to exploit those insecurities (and 
> the answer is obviously windows)

Equally? Have you looked in a dictionary to see what the word "equal"
means?

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Skip Evans]

Nathan Rixham wrote:
if it's a computer thats on, with an os, a keyboard and a network card 
connected to the internet it's insecure.


Well of course. That's like saying if it's alive it's dying.

But the question was are *nix systems more secure than Windows, and I 
think even Daniel agrees that "out of the box" installs *nix systems are 
inherently more secure because of the way they handle users and 
permissions to executables.


Daniel seemed, and he can correct me if I'm wrong, that more 
vulnerabilities are introduced via the human factor until any system can 
be rendered at risk.



--
===
Skip Evans
Big Sky Penguin, LLC
503 S Baldwin Street
Madison, Wisconsin 53703
608.250.2720
http://bigskypenguin.com

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Ashley Sheridan]

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 10:10 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
> Linux is just as susceptible to
> viruses, worms, and other malware 
I'd beg to differ. While it may be susceptible, I think it is far less
so, just because of the security it has from the off. And also, the type
of people who tend to use Linux do often tend to be more technical who
are less prone to certain methods of virus attack.


Ash
www.ashleysheridan.co.uk


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Nathan Rixham]

Robert Cummings wrote:

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:18 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
  

Daniel Brown wrote:


On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:34, Robert Cummings  wrote:
  

He didn't say it had no insecurities... he said it's hard to believe
it's "JUST AS insecure". Please provide factual sources to indicate the
validity of your statement.


Counter: please provide factual sources that it's not, whilst
keeping in mind the statements made elsewhere in this thread.

  
if it's a computer thats on, with an os, a keyboard and a network card 
connected to the internet it's insecure.



We're not debating whether it is or is not insecure... we're debating
comparitive insecurity in relation to that of Windows.

Cheers,
Rob.
  
that's my point, all OS's are equally insecure, the only thing debatable 
is which os has more people trying to exploit those insecurities (and 
the answer is obviously windows)


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Nathan Rixham]

c...@l-i-e.com wrote:

Fact is if you want to be secure just disconnect you're machine from
the internet, remove cd/dvd/floppy drives and unplug the keyboard.


You forgot to cut the internal USB cables.

:-)



when I was younger my friend got a virus on his mothers computer; his 
mother promptly removed the power lead from the computer and stated that 
it was the only way to prevent it from getting a virus. Then didn't give 
him it back for a month.


Always tickled me because
a: she was out of the box correct
b: she was convinced the virus had came down the power line

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Skip Evans]

You could also fill all empty space in the case with a polyurethane 
sealing compound for added security, and then bury it in the back yard.


Dang, I could make big bucks as a security consultant!

I'm adding this to my resume!

Skip

c...@l-i-e.com wrote:

Fact is if you want to be secure just disconnect you're machine from
the internet, remove cd/dvd/floppy drives and unplug the keyboard.


You forgot to cut the internal USB cables.

:-)




--
===
Skip Evans
Big Sky Penguin, LLC
503 S Baldwin Street
Madison, Wisconsin 53703
608.250.2720
http://bigskypenguin.com

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Nathan Rixham]

Daniel Brown wrote:

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:34, Robert Cummings  wrote:

He didn't say it had no insecurities... he said it's hard to believe
it's "JUST AS insecure". Please provide factual sources to indicate the
validity of your statement.


Counter: please provide factual sources that it's not, whilst
keeping in mind the statements made elsewhere in this thread.



if it's a computer thats on, with an os, a keyboard and a network card 
connected to the internet it's insecure.


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:18 +, Nathan Rixham wrote:
> Daniel Brown wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:34, Robert Cummings  wrote:
> >> He didn't say it had no insecurities... he said it's hard to believe
> >> it's "JUST AS insecure". Please provide factual sources to indicate the
> >> validity of your statement.
> > 
> > Counter: please provide factual sources that it's not, whilst
> > keeping in mind the statements made elsewhere in this thread.
> > 
> 
> if it's a computer thats on, with an os, a keyboard and a network card 
> connected to the internet it's insecure.

We're not debating whether it is or is not insecure... we're debating
comparitive insecurity in relation to that of Windows.

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:12 +, c...@l-i-e.com wrote:
> > Fact is if you want to be secure just disconnect you're machine from
> > the internet, remove cd/dvd/floppy drives and unplug the keyboard.
> 
> You forgot to cut the internal USB cables.

And never, EVER forget to don your tinfoil hat and robes.

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[ceo]

> Fact is if you want to be secure just disconnect you're machine from

> the internet, remove cd/dvd/floppy drives and unplug the keyboard.



You forgot to cut the internal USB cables.



:-)



-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Skip Evans]

Hey,

Well, I find the points that *nix by default restricts users to their 
own executables and Windows allows anyone to run any program (has this 
changed with Vista? I don't follow MS too closely) to be a major reason 
by default, as installed, *nix systems are more secure.


I would also bet that as/if MS loses it's monopoly on the desktop the 
type of vulgar, socially dysfunctional people who should be viscously 
beat that write malware will begin to focus on *nix systems and it will 
become an issue for us cool people as well.


Incidentally, I think building their OS on FreeBSD was about the 
smartest thing the Apple/Mac people ever did.


Skip

Robert Cummings wrote:

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 13:43 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:41, Robert Cummings  wrote:

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 13:31 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:24, Robert Cummings  wrote:

"Just as susceptible"?? Please refer me to some resources where I can
verify this statement.

http://marc.info/?t=10016019247&r=1&w=2



Meaning, "read the rest of the thread and send shortbread recipes
to your friend, Dan, instead of just reading the first couple of
messages and determining that you know the context of the entire
conversation."  ;-P


I've been reading the entire thread.

As for the shortbread recipe... my wife says she can't find it... but as
a consolation here's a tasty alternative shortbread recipe we really
like:

http://www.interjinn.com/download/recipe.shortbread_melts.png

Cheers,
Rob.


--
===
Skip Evans
Big Sky Penguin, LLC
503 S Baldwin Street
Madison, Wisconsin 53703
608.250.2720
http://bigskypenguin.com

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 13:43 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:41, Robert Cummings  wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 13:31 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:24, Robert Cummings  wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "Just as susceptible"?? Please refer me to some resources where I can
> >> > verify this statement.
> >>
> >> http://marc.info/?t=10016019247&r=1&w=2
> >
> > 
> 
> Meaning, "read the rest of the thread and send shortbread recipes
> to your friend, Dan, instead of just reading the first couple of
> messages and determining that you know the context of the entire
> conversation."  ;-P

I've been reading the entire thread.

As for the shortbread recipe... my wife says she can't find it... but as
a consolation here's a tasty alternative shortbread recipe we really
like:

http://www.interjinn.com/download/recipe.shortbread_melts.png

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:41, Robert Cummings  wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 13:31 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:24, Robert Cummings  wrote:
>> >
>> > "Just as susceptible"?? Please refer me to some resources where I can
>> > verify this statement.
>>
>> http://marc.info/?t=10016019247&r=1&w=2
>
> 

Meaning, "read the rest of the thread and send shortbread recipes
to your friend, Dan, instead of just reading the first couple of
messages and determining that you know the context of the entire
conversation."  ;-P

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 13:39 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:34, Robert Cummings  wrote:
> >
> > He didn't say it had no insecurities... he said it's hard to believe
> > it's "JUST AS insecure". Please provide factual sources to indicate the
> > validity of your statement.
> 
> Counter: please provide factual sources that it's not, whilst
> keeping in mind the statements made elsewhere in this thread.

I haven't made any claims. I've merely stated beliefs/opinion. You made
claims, thus the onus is on you to provide proof of said claims.

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 13:31 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:24, Robert Cummings  wrote:
> >
> > "Just as susceptible"?? Please refer me to some resources where I can
> > verify this statement.
> 
> http://marc.info/?t=10016019247&r=1&w=2




-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:34, Robert Cummings  wrote:
>
> He didn't say it had no insecurities... he said it's hard to believe
> it's "JUST AS insecure". Please provide factual sources to indicate the
> validity of your statement.

Counter: please provide factual sources that it's not, whilst
keeping in mind the statements made elsewhere in this thread.

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 13:13 -0500, tedd wrote:
> At 10:10 AM -0500 1/8/09, Daniel Brown wrote:
> >
> > When a vast majority is controlled by a like-minded minority,
> >evolution and advancement will suffer.
> 
> Ya think.
> 
> I've been saying that for over 20 years.
> 
> The problem is that the majority, when in doubt, will follow the majority.
> 
> It's always a safe bet to move towards the center of the herd.

Bah, sheeple! I like to stay away from the herd.

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 12:54 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 12:38, Skip Evans  wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I certainly wish there were more like you!
> >
> > If only that woman who lives down the block would give me the opportunity to
> > make her say that... *sigh*.
> 
> Coincidentally, I started developing a "secret admirer" website
> for some friends of mine for this same purpose.  Opt-in-only romantic
> communication with the added blanket of anonymity

How do you cash in a booty call if you don't know who to call at 2am
when you're drunk?

>:)

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 12:10 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:31, Skip Evans  wrote:
> >
> > From my reading I get the impression that the above statement, "Linux is
> > just as susceptible to viruses, worms, and other malware", is inaccurate.
> 
> Unfortunately, Skip, it's 100% accurate.  No operating system is
> completely secure, especially when placed in the hands of the
> end-user.

He didn't say it had no insecurities... he said it's hard to believe
it's "JUST AS insecure". Please provide factual sources to indicate the
validity of your statement.

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:21, tedd  wrote:
>
> Of what is there to know?
> For what seems all, nothing;
> But the un-rung bell yearns to rung;
> If only to hear its tone;
> The tone of being understood.
>
> tedd-1967

So you don't just write in ones and zeroes after all.  ;-P

I like it.

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:24, Robert Cummings  wrote:
>
> "Just as susceptible"?? Please refer me to some resources where I can
> verify this statement.

http://marc.info/?t=10016019247&r=1&w=2

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 13:02, tedd  wrote:
>
> Don't rely on your level of perception to determine IF software (they) have
> reached a level of cognition or not. It could be they simply have nothing to
> say to us or their level cognition is so foreign to us that we can't detect
> it.

I anticipated more of an Asimov-ian response eventually, but
that's a slightly different direction.  As you and I have discussed on
the surface our passion for AI (though not yet in depth we'll have
to change that soon, Tedd), I'm not surprised.

> We all could be working on a collective that will someday say "Okay, you're
> finished. I'll take over from here" -- or -- will take over without telling
> us.

That's another point.  Technology will inevitably take over, even
without having the cognition to realize it.  We're already well on our
way, and advancing to that end with leaps and bounds of exponential
proportions.  Technology is already replacing the majority of
biological facilities we've developed and evolved by no individual
choice of our own.  The day will soon come where illnesses and
innoculations won't even be coded with chemicals, DNA, or other
tangible materials; plagues will be developed in machine code.

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Robert Cummings]

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 10:10 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 09:38, Allan Arguelles  wrote:
> > I guess its these examples that remind us that we still need to look out
> > for ourselves. I got used to the idea that theres so little chance that
> > I'd be a target, as a linux user, I've become less aware of these things.
> 
> Considering one of the most prolific and effective email worms was
> written in the Philippines, Allan, you may have more to worry about
> than some.  ;-P
> 
> In any case, as Nate R. mentioned, Linux is just as susceptible to

"Just as susceptible"?? Please refer me to some resources where I can
verify this statement.

Cheers,
Rob.
-- 
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP


-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[tedd]

At 12:54 PM -0500 1/8/09, Daniel Brown wrote:

That aside, best of luck.  If loss is the most painful thing a
heart can endure, the yearning for opportunity is a very close second.


There you go again, making me all teary-eyed and stuff.

Of what is there to know?
For what seems all, nothing;
But the un-rung bell yearns to rung;
If only to hear its tone;
The tone of being understood.

tedd-1967

--
---
http://sperling.com  http://ancientstones.com  http://earthstones.com

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[tedd]

At 10:10 AM -0500 1/8/09, Daniel Brown wrote:


When a vast majority is controlled by a like-minded minority,
evolution and advancement will suffer.


Ya think.

I've been saying that for over 20 years.

The problem is that the majority, when in doubt, will follow the majority.

It's always a safe bet to move towards the center of the herd.

Cheers,

tedd
--
---
http://sperling.com  http://ancientstones.com  http://earthstones.com

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[tedd]

At 12:10 PM -0500 1/8/09, Daniel Brown wrote:

Someday there will be a mathematical anomaly, I'm sure,
that will eventually lead to a level of cognition, but we're not there yet.



Don't rely on your level of perception to determine IF software 
(they) have reached a level of cognition or not. It could be they 
simply have nothing to say to us or their level cognition is so 
foreign to us that we can't detect it.


We all could be working on a collective that will someday say "Okay, 
you're finished. I'll take over from here" -- or -- will take over 
without telling us.


Cheers,

tedd

--
---
http://sperling.com  http://ancientstones.com  http://earthstones.com

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 12:38, Skip Evans  wrote:
>
> But do you not think the permissions issues with who can run what on *nix
> versus XP makes it more secure?

For that and similar reasons, I compromise with the statement
that, by design, *NIX "has the potential" to be more secure, but my
earlier statement that it is just as susceptible as Windows remains
unaltered by this.  If it were an unused system, both would be equally
secure, whereas a used system is equally insecure if not properly
configured and maintained.  The difference between them is that *NIX
has more inherent security mechanisms available to the [self-]educated
operator.  It still doesn't mean that it *is* more secure simply by
design.

> Daniel Brown wrote:
>>
>>I certainly wish there were more like you!
>
> If only that woman who lives down the block would give me the opportunity to
> make her say that... *sigh*.

Coincidentally, I started developing a "secret admirer" website
for some friends of mine for this same purpose.  Opt-in-only romantic
communication with the added blanket of anonymity (I don't plan on
using it as a business, only with the target of helping friends get
their feelings out with each other).  They're wonderful folks, but are
painfully shy.  It's certainly not a new concept, but neither is the
idea of a "secret admirer."  Sometimes all we need to do is view
someone in a different light to really understand what it is they've
been trying to tell us all along.  And perhaps that "different light"
could be achieved through the fog and obscurity the Internet offers.

That aside, best of luck.  If loss is the most painful thing a
heart can endure, the yearning for opportunity is a very close second.

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Nathan Rixham]

Daniel Brown wrote:

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:31, Skip Evans  wrote:

From my reading I get the impression that the above statement, "Linux is
just as susceptible to viruses, worms, and other malware", is inaccurate.


Unfortunately, Skip, it's 100% accurate.  No operating system is
completely secure, especially when placed in the hands of the
end-user.  Believing that the statement is inaccurate is not only
dangerous, but is also tantamount to saying, "people of African decent
have inherently thicker skulls than caucasians, so they will fair
better when shot in the cranium with a pistol."  I'll elaborate more
on why it's ultimately not an OS issue at the end of this email.



I'd also reckon that most OS's are made 1000 times more vunerable by the 
apps installed and the user configs applied - even the old "permissions 
problems, just 777 it" thats so common amongst web devs. Fact is if you 
want to be secure just disconnect you're machine from the internet, 
remove cd/dvd/floppy drives and unplug the keyboard.



Here are some links to good articles written by far more qualified
individuals than myself.

http://nnucomputerwhiz.com/linux-virus.html


Not only do I wholeheartedly disagree with Stone's summary
statement (at the link above) regarding susceptibility, it is easily
countered by a simple fact: open source systems such as Linux mean
that the source can be viewed and exploits discovered, rather than
through reverse-engineering, decompilation, or brute-force
trial-and-error tactics.


http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/index.php?page=virus#virus3


This is a well-formed essay, and supports my statement below as well.


Full disclosure: I run Ubuntu Linux for workstations, FreeBSD Unix for
servers, and have a Mac running OS X for testing Safari, and use Windows
only for testing IE and specific Windows software.


I'm in the Mandrake/Mandriva camp for desktops, CentOS and my own
proprietary Linux (nicknamed "Intrinsic Linux" since I started
building it) for servers, and then the necessary-evil XP and Vista
boxes for testing and other such things.


I much prefer a well set up *Nix system to Windows any day.


I certainly wish there were more like you!  And here's why - as
well as to explain my statement as to why ALL operating systems are
equally susceptible:



I've found a nice little balance for my desktop; vista with ubuntu & 
centos running as virtual boxes - means I can have call of duty 5 and 
eclipse running at the same time whilst one virtual box runs my 
apache/tomcat/mysql and the other runs apache/jboss/postgres with 
several php deamons running too. best of all worlds not being limited to 
one OS - so I'm firmly in both camps (but nix only for servers)



Knowledge, skill, and experience of the end-user.

Common sense tells us that a logical system would not willingly
infect itself.  The same cannot be said for the parasites that attach
themselves to the system's keyboards.  The most perfect system in the
world can be easily crippled by placing a biological connector between
the input devices and the chair.

Further, a classification of malware: any software that is written
with malicious intent.

Very basic, below-entry-level *NIX malware programming:

#!/bin/bash
rm -fR /

You would know not to run that as root, of course.  If your skill
was not of a level where you could reason the difference between good
and bad, you would expect the "computer" to differentiate "good" and
"bad" code as a means of self-preservation.  Should you then be
convinced to run that code using simple social engineering tactics
("Skip, this file will ensure that all of your software is up-to-date
by running `rm` on the system, which is the UNIX Release Manager."),
you may well defeat any security and "intelligence" the system has in
place.  This is a VERY simple explanation, of course, but is in place
to show the fundamentals of computer security --- when a system is in
place to ultimately interact with a person - even indirectly - that
system is vulnerable, regardless of architecture.



nice point to raise; my personal pet peeve is the human worm; chain 
emails - I'd class them worse than spam and worms put together "make a 
wish and forward this to 50 people" and they do it.



The most important things to remember: the most "intelligent" of
computer systems can be defeated by the most simplistic and inept of
apes; if and when systems are able to develop their own free will to
override basic logic, they will begin to defeat themselves.

Keeping in mind that all viruses, worms, and other malware are
nothing more than automated cracks ("hacks" would be grossly abused if
used in this context), it would be to say that *NIX systems are far
less hackable than Windows systems.  Now compare these four statements
for the correlation:

* The term "hacking" is most commonly affiliated with Internet
systems such as web and electronic mail servers.
* The majo

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Skip Evans]

Hey Daniel,

It seems that most of your points of disagreement stem from the 
potential for poor system administration by homo sapiens (and other 
primates who might have access to a console), but I still think that 
from a pure design and implementation perspective, *nix systems are more 
secure for the reasons the articles point out.


Certainly any system can suffer reduced security through laziness or 
poor administration. I mean, how many amateur system administrators 
respond to "I have a permissions problem" with "chmod 777 *"?


But do you not think the permissions issues with who can run what on 
*nix versus XP makes it more secure?



Daniel Brown wrote:
I certainly wish there were more like you!  


If only that woman who lives down the block would give me the 
opportunity to make her say that... *sigh*.

--
===
Skip Evans
Big Sky Penguin, LLC
503 S Baldwin Street
Madison, Wisconsin 53703
608.250.2720
http://bigskypenguin.com

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:31, Skip Evans  wrote:
>
> From my reading I get the impression that the above statement, "Linux is
> just as susceptible to viruses, worms, and other malware", is inaccurate.

Unfortunately, Skip, it's 100% accurate.  No operating system is
completely secure, especially when placed in the hands of the
end-user.  Believing that the statement is inaccurate is not only
dangerous, but is also tantamount to saying, "people of African decent
have inherently thicker skulls than caucasians, so they will fair
better when shot in the cranium with a pistol."  I'll elaborate more
on why it's ultimately not an OS issue at the end of this email.

> Here are some links to good articles written by far more qualified
> individuals than myself.
>
> http://nnucomputerwhiz.com/linux-virus.html

Not only do I wholeheartedly disagree with Stone's summary
statement (at the link above) regarding susceptibility, it is easily
countered by a simple fact: open source systems such as Linux mean
that the source can be viewed and exploits discovered, rather than
through reverse-engineering, decompilation, or brute-force
trial-and-error tactics.

> http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/index.php?page=virus#virus3

This is a well-formed essay, and supports my statement below as well.

> Full disclosure: I run Ubuntu Linux for workstations, FreeBSD Unix for
> servers, and have a Mac running OS X for testing Safari, and use Windows
> only for testing IE and specific Windows software.

I'm in the Mandrake/Mandriva camp for desktops, CentOS and my own
proprietary Linux (nicknamed "Intrinsic Linux" since I started
building it) for servers, and then the necessary-evil XP and Vista
boxes for testing and other such things.

> I much prefer a well set up *Nix system to Windows any day.

I certainly wish there were more like you!  And here's why - as
well as to explain my statement as to why ALL operating systems are
equally susceptible:

Knowledge, skill, and experience of the end-user.

Common sense tells us that a logical system would not willingly
infect itself.  The same cannot be said for the parasites that attach
themselves to the system's keyboards.  The most perfect system in the
world can be easily crippled by placing a biological connector between
the input devices and the chair.

Further, a classification of malware: any software that is written
with malicious intent.

Very basic, below-entry-level *NIX malware programming:

#!/bin/bash
rm -fR /

You would know not to run that as root, of course.  If your skill
was not of a level where you could reason the difference between good
and bad, you would expect the "computer" to differentiate "good" and
"bad" code as a means of self-preservation.  Should you then be
convinced to run that code using simple social engineering tactics
("Skip, this file will ensure that all of your software is up-to-date
by running `rm` on the system, which is the UNIX Release Manager."),
you may well defeat any security and "intelligence" the system has in
place.  This is a VERY simple explanation, of course, but is in place
to show the fundamentals of computer security --- when a system is in
place to ultimately interact with a person - even indirectly - that
system is vulnerable, regardless of architecture.

The most important things to remember: the most "intelligent" of
computer systems can be defeated by the most simplistic and inept of
apes; if and when systems are able to develop their own free will to
override basic logic, they will begin to defeat themselves.

Keeping in mind that all viruses, worms, and other malware are
nothing more than automated cracks ("hacks" would be grossly abused if
used in this context), it would be to say that *NIX systems are far
less hackable than Windows systems.  Now compare these four statements
for the correlation:

* The term "hacking" is most commonly affiliated with Internet
systems such as web and electronic mail servers.
* The majority of web and email servers utilize a POSIX
(*NIX)-like operating system.
* The term "computer virus" (generalizing the term) is most
commonly affiliated with desktop systems.
* The majority of desktop systems utilize a Microsoft Windows
operating system.

In summary, it's not the operating system that is more secure once
it's in use, it's the knowledge of the person managing that operating
system, coupling their skill and diligence.  All operating systems are
susceptible to attack; it's the responsibility of the operator to
ensure that this exposure is limited.

On a final note, I watched a documentary this morning that my wife
recorded for me on 42 attempts on Hitler's life (I have always been a
WWII buff, though I'm glad to have been born well after the era).  In
those 42 recorded assassination attempts, fate was the only thing that
saved him.  There was a surprisingly lackluster security staff
surrounding (at the time) one of

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Skip Evans]

Daniel Brown wrote:

In any case, as Nate R. mentioned, Linux is just as susceptible to
viruses, worms, and other malware.  My belief is that it's not so much
an attack on an Evil Empire[TM] of software, but that, if BeOS or RISC
were the single-most popular operating systems in the world, Windows
wouldn't get the misguided attention it gets.



Hey all,

From my reading I get the impression that the above statement, "Linux 
is just as susceptible to viruses, worms, and other malware", is 
inaccurate.


Here are some links to good articles written by far more qualified 
individuals than myself.


http://nnucomputerwhiz.com/linux-virus.html

http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/index.php?page=virus#virus3

Full disclosure: I run Ubuntu Linux for workstations, FreeBSD Unix for 
servers, and have a Mac running OS X for testing Safari, and use Windows 
only for testing IE and specific Windows software.


I much prefer a well set up *Nix system to Windows any day.

Skip



--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 09:38, Allan Arguelles  wrote:
> I guess its these examples that remind us that we still need to look out
> for ourselves. I got used to the idea that theres so little chance that
> I'd be a target, as a linux user, I've become less aware of these things.

Considering one of the most prolific and effective email worms was
written in the Philippines, Allan, you may have more to worry about
than some.  ;-P

In any case, as Nate R. mentioned, Linux is just as susceptible to
viruses, worms, and other malware.  My belief is that it's not so much
an attack on an Evil Empire[TM] of software, but that, if BeOS or RISC
were the single-most popular operating systems in the world, Windows
wouldn't get the misguided attention it gets.

That aside, I still don't endorse Windows or any mass-produced
proprietary software.  Not to go against the grain, but because that
severely hinders evolution of all technology.  Windows had an
estimated 92.24% of the desktop market share in September, 2008,
according to Net Applications studies (the industry-standard measure).
 There's a pretty cool visualization of this done by IBM at
http://manyeyes.alphaworks.ibm.com/manyeyes/visualizations/desktop-operating-system-market-shar.

When a vast majority is controlled by a like-minded minority,
evolution and advancement will suffer.

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Allan Arguelles]

I guess its these examples that remind us that we still need to look out
for ourselves. I got used to the idea that theres so little chance that
I'd be a target, as a linux user, I've become less aware of these things.

Daniel Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 04:53, Robert Cummings  wrote:
>   
>> In fact, since the only text in the message other than the stripped
>> attachment is "Please read the document." I am led to strongly suspect
>> that it was a virus. Additionally, the addition of a supposed anti-virus
>> check is usually added to such virus attachment emails to help the
>> unwashed fool think it's not a virus *lol*.
>> 
>
> Correct.  It's the old Netsky worm - it's got to be at least three
> or four years old by now, I'd guess.  I'm honestly somewhat amazed
> that folks still fall for it and infect themselves, and that those are
> the same folks that would subscribe to a technical list.
>
> Neat.
>
> (Yeah, I'm looking at you, `bigredlinux` who obviously is
> using BlueScreenWindows)
>
>   

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Daniel Brown]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 04:53, Robert Cummings  wrote:
>
> In fact, since the only text in the message other than the stripped
> attachment is "Please read the document." I am led to strongly suspect
> that it was a virus. Additionally, the addition of a supposed anti-virus
> check is usually added to such virus attachment emails to help the
> unwashed fool think it's not a virus *lol*.

Correct.  It's the old Netsky worm - it's got to be at least three
or four years old by now, I'd guess.  I'm honestly somewhat amazed
that folks still fall for it and infect themselves, and that those are
the same folks that would subscribe to a technical list.

Neat.

(Yeah, I'm looking at you, `bigredlinux` who obviously is
using BlueScreenWindows)

-- 

daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out!

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Nathan Rixham]

Carlos Medina wrote:

Allan Arguelles schrieb:

Yeah, I was reluctant to open the attachment, but then again I'm on
gentoo :)

I've forgotten about these "threats" eversince I switched over, didn't
even notice the bounced email(to the sender) as an indication.


-Allan

Robert Cummings wrote:

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 17:27 +0800, Allan Arguelles wrote:
 

I only see this in the attachment:

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php


That's because the list software strips attachments to prevent idiots
using windows from opening them and unleashing a virus onto their
system.

In fact, since the only text in the message other than the stripped
attachment is "Please read the document." I am led to strongly suspect
that it was a virus. Additionally, the addition of a supposed anti-virus
check is usually added to such virus attachment emails to help the
unwashed fool think it's not a virus *lol*.

Cheers,
Rob.

 

bigredli...@yahoo.com wrote:
   

Please read the document.

 Attachment: No Virus found
 F-Secure AntiVirus - www.f-secure.com




I known viruses for Linux/Unix Systems too...

Carlos


yup, the greatest malware known to linux is the misconception that linux 
can't get viruses.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux_computer_viruses#Viruses

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Re: hello

[Carlos Medina]

Allan Arguelles schrieb:

Yeah, I was reluctant to open the attachment, but then again I'm on
gentoo :)

I've forgotten about these "threats" eversince I switched over, didn't
even notice the bounced email(to the sender) as an indication.


-Allan

Robert Cummings wrote:

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 17:27 +0800, Allan Arguelles wrote:
  

I only see this in the attachment:

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php


That's because the list software strips attachments to prevent idiots
using windows from opening them and unleashing a virus onto their
system.

In fact, since the only text in the message other than the stripped
attachment is "Please read the document." I am led to strongly suspect
that it was a virus. Additionally, the addition of a supposed anti-virus
check is usually added to such virus attachment emails to help the
unwashed fool think it's not a virus *lol*.

Cheers,
Rob.

  

bigredli...@yahoo.com wrote:


Please read the document.

 Attachment: No Virus found
 F-Secure AntiVirus - www.f-secure.com


  
  

I known viruses for Linux/Unix Systems too...

Carlos

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php