Re: Time to get rid of weird connected appliances! <> check this

[jim stephens]

On 10/23/2016 9:32 PM, Cameron Kaiser wrote:

Similarly, my home camera system connects to an Axis concentrator
I'm using Foscam cameras, which are ip connected, but the model I have 
isn't "cloud" connected, there is a mini DVR the size of a cigarette 
pack that does a 16 channel recorder to an attached USB drive.


You do all yourself.  paranoia is a good thing.

Mouse mentioned Sparc systems.  I know of a friend who runs a well known 
site to us (not Jay) on an Alpha for the reasons Mouse mentioned.


Thanks
jim

Re: Time to get rid of weird connected appliances! <> check this

[Cameron Kaiser]

> Nevertheless, most IoT devices only talk (outgoing) to some server in 
> some cloud, and are reasonably safe, at least until the server is 
> attacked.

Which is why I'll only buy systems for which the API is either open or
well-understood.

I have several sets of Philips hue bulb networks in the house. They sit
on the secured non-routable internal network and have never been able to
phone home. The central server drives them directly using a Perl tool I
wrote (huepl), and now the security and access controls are metered by me,
not by Philips.

Similarly, my home camera system connects to an Axis concentrator that
is only accessible on that same non-routable network. The central server
grabs snapshots and motion JPEG feeds from it. Again, the security is
now in my hands.

I admit I'm paranoid and having this requirement reduces the amount of
hardware I'll see fit to buy, but usually it reduces it to the higher
quality devices in any case.

-- 
 personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
  Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckai...@floodgap.com
-- Reality is when it finally happens to you, too. 

Tek 40xx computer users

[Randy Dawson]

I bought the Tek 4051 on ebay today; Jason brought it to my house and it works 
perfectly, with about a half hour of programming instruction my 12 old daughter 
was plotting a cat face.


https://www.facebook.com/Thelma.Franco/videos/10154277153852670/


I would like to get in touch with other users of this first personal computer, 
and find additional resources.


Do you know where I can find an archive of BASIC programs for this?


Has anybody built plug in cards in the back, mine came with a realtime clock 
and a "file manager", I do not know what that one does.


I have some Tek scopes with IEE-488, and I will see if I can get the IEEE 
interface working.


There was a DC300 tape in the machine:


biorithm

craps

blackjack

artillery

tanks

weatherwar


The belt is broken in the tape, I have ordered some new DC300's and will 
transplant the tape.


Any resources will be welcome!


Randy

Re: Archived viruses, was Re: Reasonable price for a complete SOL-20 system?

[Mouse]

> My favorite formatter was my S100 crate with CP/M, [it's] impossible
> to give a single user OS without background processing a virus.

I disagree.  I see nothing about "a single-user OS without background
processing" that would prevent a virus from infecting other programs,
even including the OS, when it's run, and potentially doing something
else as well.

Perhaps you are using some meaning of "virus" other than "piece of
software that infects other software to propagate itself"?  That's the
only meaning that makes any sense to me.

/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTMLmo...@rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email!   7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B

Re: Archived viruses, was Re: Reasonable price for a complete SOL-20 system?

[Mouse]

>>> [...anti-virus...]
>> [...]
> Just wondering are you guys not running AV SW on your old HW?

I am not.

But then, because of my interests, the old hardware I keep is stuff
like Sun SPARCs that are powerful enough to run a real operating
system.  These are (a) inherently invulnerable to most of the malware
(including viruses) out there because they're not x86 Windows and (b)
difficult to attack with targeted malware because they are real OSes
with real interprocess protection, file protection, and the like.

Probably not impossible; all nontrivial software has bugs.  But I have
no reason to think I'm likely to be targeted by anyone with the
resources (= skills, mostly) to effectively attack my OSes.  And I'm
familiar enough with their operation that most successful malware is
likely to be noticed relatively soon.  And if I am somehow targeted by
the likes of letter agencies, there are much weaker links in the chains
for them than the things malware attacks.  And "AV SW", even if someone
produced one that ran on what I run and I were willin gto run it,
generally isn't going to notice custom-designed malware anyway.

/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTMLmo...@rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email!   7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B

Re: ASTEC 8151 PSU (TRS80, Osborne etc)

[Adrian Graham]

On 24/10/2016 00:30, "Jules Richardson" 
wrote:

> On 10/23/2016 08:02 AM, Adrian Graham wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>> 
>> Now that the bouncing has calmed down I've got a question about this here
>> triple output pretty ubiquitous power supply. This one had some burst caps
>> so naturally wasn't working and was probably why the machine it came out of
>> was taken out of use.
>> 
>> I've replaced all of them because why not, along with the .1uF mains
>> filtering cap that would also burst at some point and I still get low output
>> on all rails.
> 
> Low output in-circuit? If not, are you using a large enough dummy load
> (probably just necessary on whichever output rail is deemed to be the main
> one)?
> 
> Without enough load the regulation on switchers often doesn't work, and low
> outputs are a typical result...

Yep, and I hear this all the time about Apple ][s, but the PSUs from the
last few machines I've done have worked without a load, and these PSUs also
normally work without load also. Maybe it's a US/UK thing. I'm learning as I
go on

-- 
Adrian/Witchy
Binary Dinosaurs creator/curator
Www.binarydinosaurs.co.uk - the UK's biggest private home computer
collection?

Re: ASTEC 8151 PSU (TRS80, Osborne etc)

[Jules Richardson]

On 10/23/2016 08:02 AM, Adrian Graham wrote:

Hi folks,

Now that the bouncing has calmed down I've got a question about this here
triple output pretty ubiquitous power supply. This one had some burst caps
so naturally wasn't working and was probably why the machine it came out of
was taken out of use.

I've replaced all of them because why not, along with the .1uF mains
filtering cap that would also burst at some point and I still get low output
on all rails.


Low output in-circuit? If not, are you using a large enough dummy load 
(probably just necessary on whichever output rail is deemed to be the main 
one)?


Without enough load the regulation on switchers often doesn't work, and low 
outputs are a typical result...

RE: Time to get rid of weird connected appliances! <> check this

[Electronics Plus]

In 2011 Barnaby Jack warned of insulin pump attacks 
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnaby_Jack) yet in 2016 J had to warn their 
customers that they were vulnerable to attack 
(https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20161004/06242635699/johnson-johnson-warns-insulin-pump-owners-they-could-be-killed-hackers.shtml).
 When are companies going to get compliant with security?

-Original Message-
From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Alexandre Souza
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2016 2:36 PM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: Time to get rid of weird connected appliances! <> 
check this

A good linux machine running a firewall wouldn't make all of this work 
flawlessly?


2016-10-23 17:31 GMT-02:00 Chuck Guzis :

> On 10/23/2016 01:29 AM, Guy Dawson wrote:
> > It's not so much an attack on IoT as with IoT. The worm's ( assuming 
> > a compromised IoT device is used to compromise others - I'm not sure 
> > about this) job is to make IoT devices available to a control system 
> > so that IoT devices can be used to generate the loads needed in DDOS 
> > attacks.
> >
> > The attackers would rather you did not know your IoT devices were 
> > compromised as that way you'll leave them connected to the Internet 
> > and under their control.
>
> I contrast NFC and IoT.  At least to me, "IoT" implies an 
> Internet-connected device.  NFC implies only that there's a device 
> that can communicate wirelessly with nearby devices.
>
> Having said that, if one prowls the web for vulnerabilities in, say, 
> DSL modems, it's shocking.  Many, if not most, are running some sort 
> of Linux, usually BusyBox (not known for its security).  There are 
> millions of the things out there, many with telnet enabled and still 
> with the default password.  The ISPs who distribute these things 
> usually view them as "black boxes" and apparently have little interest in 
> security.
>
> Whether or not some malefactor can hack a Carrier or Trane connected 
> thermostat is something that I've not researched.
>
> --Chuck
>

RE: Time to get rid of weird connected appliances! <> check this

[Dave Wade]

> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Alexandre
> Souza
> Sent: 23 October 2016 20:36
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
> 
> Subject: Re: Time to get rid of weird connected appliances! < DIE>> check this
> 
> A good linux machine running a firewall wouldn't make all of this work
> flawlessly?
> 

Not once the devices are compromised. There are many devices, each device just 
needs to deliver a single DNS lookup.

Dave

Re: DEC bus transceivers

[Toby Thain]

On 2016-10-23 2:50 PM, shad wrote:

Hello,
surely the old transceivers are the most compatible solution, however you
still need to convert the voltages back and forth...
Plus the solution is not the cheaper, and a little uncomfortable too, as
you need to find these old chips, hoping not to buy fake chinese duplicates
(it happened to me more time unfortunately).

So I was searching a solution with modern components, but not using
components too much specific and difficult to be found.

As we need 3.3v logic, but able to work in 5v bus, I'm thinking about 5v
tolerant standard logic as TI LVC or LVT.
The problem is that there aren't open drain bus transceivers, but the
problem could be solved simply using input-only and output-only components,
connecting two in parallel but opposite direction on bidirectional pins.
So identifying one or maybe two codes would be enough for all the
components needed for the board.

The idea of using bare transistors seems to me too much simple.
Not that it couldn't work, but it would be almost impossible to satisfy all
the specifications of the bus in this way... unless you use a more complex
circuit with precise current sources and resistors to grant correct voltage
biases, impedances and slew rates, which in the end is a logic integrated
circuit.

Andrea



As an electronics noob, I'm really waiting for somebody to publish their 
findings on this, comprehensively, so I can steal their labour.


Has anyone done so? Is anyone planning to do so? I know that this topic 
flares up on the list every 6 months ago in a series of disjointed posts 
and observations. The gold is hard to find (especially for aforesaid noobs).


--Toby

Re: Time to get rid of weird connected appliances! <> check this

[Pete Turnbull]

On 23/10/2016 20:41, Alexis Kotlowy wrote:

On 24/10/2016 06:05, Alexandre Souza wrote:

A good linux machine running a firewall wouldn't make all of this
work flawlessly?


The problem is the 'average consumer' isn't going to bother with that.
They'll just wire up their IoT devices, for convenience sake, and leave
it to do its thing.


True, but for many devices it's irrelevant because you can't easily get 
to them from the internet.  Some security cameras are an obvious 
exception, along with other things you might connect to directly while 
"out and about" - things you have to set up "port forwarding" for. 
Nevertheless, most IoT devices only talk (outgoing) to some server in 
some cloud, and are reasonably safe, at least until the server is 
attacked.  That's true of my thermostats and central heating control, 
for example, and you won't easily get to them over my wifi because they 
use almost-random 30-character keys.  Attackers go for the low-hanging 
fruit.



Unfortunately the number of people who will do this
far outweigh the people who know what they're doing.


Also true :-(  And that applies as much to many manufacturers as to end 
users.  Two of my above-mentioned thermostats were originally limited to 
an 8-character alphanumeric key, until I made a fuss about WiFi Alliance 
standards.


As for modems/routers, over here (UK) the ISPs tend to go for fairly 
random 12-20 character passwords which aren't even obviously related to 
the MAC address.  Even so, I ignored my ISP's offering in favour of 
something a bit more high-end, carefully configured, but I still see an 
average of about two connection attempts

a second.

--
Pete
Pete Turnbull

Re: Time to get rid of weird connected appliances! <> check this

[Alexandre Souza]

Too stupid of me forgetting about the common man :( Sorry! :D

2016-10-23 17:41 GMT-02:00 Alexis Kotlowy :

> On 24/10/2016 06:05, Alexandre Souza wrote:
>
>> A good linux machine running a firewall wouldn't make all of this
>> work flawlessly?
>>
>
> The problem is the 'average consumer' isn't going to bother with that.
> They'll just wire up their IoT devices, for convenience sake, and leave
> it to do its thing. Unfortunately the number of people who will do this
> far outweigh the people who know what they're doing.
>
> Alexis
>

Free - IBM PS/2 model 30-286, 50, and 77 for spares/repairs. (Bristol, England)

[Tom Moss]

Hi All,

I have a few IBM PS/2s in various states of disrepair that are free to
anyone willing to collect from Yatton (Near Bristol), or arrange a courier.

Systems as follows:

Model 30-286 - powers on to BASIC prompt, bad floppy drive, missing hard
drive. A few minor scuffs, should make an easy restoration.

Model 50 - Boots from HDD to DOS, has bad sectors but might be OK after a
low level format, haven't tried it because the FDD is bad. Includes
untested tape drive in the second 3.5" drive bay. Some rust spots on case.

Model 77 - Very good cosmetic condition but doesn't power on, corrosion
around the BIOS chip so I'm guessing it's because of that.

If anyone's interested I can take photos and find out the system specs. I
also have one of the later IBM PS/2 mice.

Regards,
-Tom

Re: Time to get rid of weird connected appliances! <> check this

[Alexis Kotlowy]

On 24/10/2016 06:05, Alexandre Souza wrote:

A good linux machine running a firewall wouldn't make all of this
work flawlessly?


The problem is the 'average consumer' isn't going to bother with that.
They'll just wire up their IoT devices, for convenience sake, and leave
it to do its thing. Unfortunately the number of people who will do this
far outweigh the people who know what they're doing.

Alexis

Re: Time to get rid of weird connected appliances! <> check this

[Alexandre Souza]

A good linux machine running a firewall wouldn't make all of this work
flawlessly?


2016-10-23 17:31 GMT-02:00 Chuck Guzis :

> On 10/23/2016 01:29 AM, Guy Dawson wrote:
> > It's not so much an attack on IoT as with IoT. The worm's ( assuming
> > a compromised IoT device is used to compromise others - I'm not sure
> > about this) job is to make IoT devices available to a control system
> > so that IoT devices can be used to generate the loads needed in DDOS
> > attacks.
> >
> > The attackers would rather you did not know your IoT devices were
> > compromised as that way you'll leave them connected to the Internet
> > and under their control.
>
> I contrast NFC and IoT.  At least to me, "IoT" implies an
> Internet-connected device.  NFC implies only that there's a device that
> can communicate wirelessly with nearby devices.
>
> Having said that, if one prowls the web for vulnerabilities in, say, DSL
> modems, it's shocking.  Many, if not most, are running some sort of
> Linux, usually BusyBox (not known for its security).  There are millions
> of the things out there, many with telnet enabled and still with the
> default password.  The ISPs who distribute these things usually view
> them as "black boxes" and apparently have little interest in security.
>
> Whether or not some malefactor can hack a Carrier or Trane connected
> thermostat is something that I've not researched.
>
> --Chuck
>

Re: Time to get rid of weird connected appliances! <> check this

[Chuck Guzis]

On 10/23/2016 01:29 AM, Guy Dawson wrote:
> It's not so much an attack on IoT as with IoT. The worm's ( assuming
> a compromised IoT device is used to compromise others - I'm not sure
> about this) job is to make IoT devices available to a control system
> so that IoT devices can be used to generate the loads needed in DDOS
> attacks.
> 
> The attackers would rather you did not know your IoT devices were 
> compromised as that way you'll leave them connected to the Internet
> and under their control.

I contrast NFC and IoT.  At least to me, "IoT" implies an
Internet-connected device.  NFC implies only that there's a device that
can communicate wirelessly with nearby devices.

Having said that, if one prowls the web for vulnerabilities in, say, DSL
modems, it's shocking.  Many, if not most, are running some sort of
Linux, usually BusyBox (not known for its security).  There are millions
of the things out there, many with telnet enabled and still with the
default password.  The ISPs who distribute these things usually view
them as "black boxes" and apparently have little interest in security.

Whether or not some malefactor can hack a Carrier or Trane connected
thermostat is something that I've not researched.

--Chuck

Re: DEC bus transceivers

[Al Kossow]

On 10/23/16 11:50 AM, shad wrote:

> The problem is that there aren't open drain bus transceivers, but the
> problem could be solved simply using input-only and output-only components,
> connecting two in parallel but opposite direction on bidirectional pins.
> 

The reason for using the old parts is the logic thresholds are unique to
the Unibus to handle worst-case bus loading and the termination voltage they
used.

Re: DEC bus transceivers

[shadoooo]

Hello,
surely the old transceivers are the most compatible solution, however you
still need to convert the voltages back and forth...
Plus the solution is not the cheaper, and a little uncomfortable too, as
you need to find these old chips, hoping not to buy fake chinese duplicates
(it happened to me more time unfortunately).

So I was searching a solution with modern components, but not using
components too much specific and difficult to be found.

As we need 3.3v logic, but able to work in 5v bus, I'm thinking about 5v
tolerant standard logic as TI LVC or LVT.
The problem is that there aren't open drain bus transceivers, but the
problem could be solved simply using input-only and output-only components,
connecting two in parallel but opposite direction on bidirectional pins.
So identifying one or maybe two codes would be enough for all the
components needed for the board.

The idea of using bare transistors seems to me too much simple.
Not that it couldn't work, but it would be almost impossible to satisfy all
the specifications of the bus in this way... unless you use a more complex
circuit with precise current sources and resistors to grant correct voltage
biases, impedances and slew rates, which in the end is a logic integrated
circuit.

Andrea

RE: Archived viruses, was Re: Reasonable price for a complete SOL-20 system?

[Electronics Plus]

-Original Message-
From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Liam Proven
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2016 9:37 AM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: Archived viruses, was Re: Reasonable price for a complete SOL-20 
system?

On 22 October 2016 at 21:21, Fred Cisin  wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Oct 2016, Liam Proven wrote:
>>
>> :-)
>> A good 5-6y or more ago I restored an old Mac Classic II a friend 
>> gave me. I got it dual-booting System 6.0.8 and 7.1 and had both of 
>> them online via an Asanté EtherSCSI interface. To do this involved 
>> downloading a lot of ancient Mac software on my B G3 under OS X, 
>> and putting it on Zip disk, then putting the Zip media in the Classic 
>> II's SCSI Zip drive.
>> One of the Systems on the Classic was repurposed from another Mac and 
>> included some ancient Mac antivirus program -- I forget which one, 
>> maybe Disinfectant. I was glad of it, though, as it triggered and 
>> found one of my downloads was infected with an equally ancient Mac 
>> virus.
>
>
> But "Marketing" convinced the public that Macs were IMMUNE TO GETTING
> VIRUSES!:-)


No no no -- hang on.

Classic MacOS was appallingly vulnerable. It had no user-account security at 
all, and every disk had a tiny bit of code read and executed when it was 
mounted, AIUI, to customise the icon etc.

Personal computer viruses more or less originated on the classic Mac.

But OS X is effectively immune to all of them, and AFAIK there are no true 
viruses for OS X even now. But you need to use a narrow strict definition. 
There are many Trojans, but they need to social-engineer or trick the user into 
agreeing, clicking OK and entering a password.
That's not a virus if it requires user interaction to propagate.

Ditto there are sploits and worms that attack OS X servers, but since OS X 
servers are fairly rare, so are the sploits. And OS X has a much-modified 
FreeBSD userland underneath it, and some of those componets are vulnerable too.

So it's a bit of a hair-splitting argument.

What it is _not_ is plain marketing lies, such as "Windows NT is a microkernel".

--
Liam Proven • Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • GMail/Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven
Skype/MSN: lpro...@hotmail.com • LinkedIn/AIM/Yahoo: liamproven
Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) • +420 702 829 053 (ČR)

I still have sealed packs of installation software for very early laptops with 
DOS. Some of them probably have the Stoned virus on them. I used to have 
factory original CD install disks from Zip drives, but I threw them all out, 
because they were all infected with viruses. Iomega was kind enough to send me 
clean install disks, after I mailed them back one of the infected disks. That 
prompted a huge recall, back in the 90s. I remember seeing web screens in the 
early 2000s from viruses; one was a picture of Zeus holding a lightning bolt 
with the caption "Watch out for Zeus, he will kick your ass!" Another was a 
picture of the old Kilroy was here, but had the caption of Kiljoy was here. 
Kiljoy would stay on for about 5 seconds, and then gradually all the network 
services would be stopped and then deleted from the computer.

Re: VTServer/etc for V6 Unix

[william degnan]

On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Noel Chiappa 
wrote:

> The fact that the installation procedures for V6 and V7 are wholly
> different,
> in their technical detail, was apparently not well known.
>
> The 'Setting up Unix' documents are more checklists, they don't go into a
> lot
> of detail as to what is actually happening, so I have prepared two pages on
> the Computer History wiki:
>
>   http://gunkies.org/wiki/Installing_UNIX_Sixth_Edition
>   http://gunkies.org/wiki/Installing_UNIX_Seventh_Edition
>
> which go into more detail on what is actually happening.
>
> Noel
>


Thanks, this is useful information.
Bill

Re: PDP-11 RL02 disk emulation

[Noel Chiappa]

> From: Scott Baker

> Feedback on this project is most welcome.

Any chance it could be put into 'production'? It just seems to me that
rather than having 53 people send in individual orders for boards, etc
it would be better (and also perhaps get a price break due to volume)
to do a small run. (You may not want to produce complete boards, but
even kits would be useful.)

I think an RL02 simulator is a great idea; those of us with RL0x controllers
could use this most of the time, avoiding potential damage to our old
drives/disks; I know I would buy several if they were available.

Also, what FPGA board are you using? I assume it's one that has an SD
card socket or something, for actually storing the bits on?

Noel

Re: VTServer/etc for V6 Unix

[Noel Chiappa]

The fact that the installation procedures for V6 and V7 are wholly different,
in their technical detail, was apparently not well known.

The 'Setting up Unix' documents are more checklists, they don't go into a lot
of detail as to what is actually happening, so I have prepared two pages on
the Computer History wiki:

  http://gunkies.org/wiki/Installing_UNIX_Sixth_Edition
  http://gunkies.org/wiki/Installing_UNIX_Seventh_Edition

which go into more detail on what is actually happening.

Noel

Re: Archived viruses, was Re: Reasonable price for a complete SOL-20 system?

[Liam Proven]

On 22 October 2016 at 21:21, Fred Cisin  wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Oct 2016, Liam Proven wrote:
>>
>> :-)
>> A good 5-6y or more ago I restored an old Mac Classic II a friend gave
>> me. I got it dual-booting System 6.0.8 and 7.1 and had both of them
>> online via an Asanté EtherSCSI interface. To do this involved
>> downloading a lot of ancient Mac software on my B G3 under OS X, and
>> putting it on Zip disk, then putting the Zip media in the Classic II's
>> SCSI Zip drive.
>> One of the Systems on the Classic was repurposed from another Mac and
>> included some ancient Mac antivirus program -- I forget which one,
>> maybe Disinfectant. I was glad of it, though, as it triggered and
>> found one of my downloads was infected with an equally ancient Mac
>> virus.
>
>
> But "Marketing" convinced the public that Macs were IMMUNE TO GETTING
> VIRUSES!:-)


No no no -- hang on.

Classic MacOS was appallingly vulnerable. It had no user-account
security at all, and every disk had a tiny bit of code read and
executed when it was mounted, AIUI, to customise the icon etc.

Personal computer viruses more or less originated on the classic Mac.

But OS X is effectively immune to all of them, and AFAIK there are no
true viruses for OS X even now. But you need to use a narrow strict
definition. There are many Trojans, but they need to social-engineer
or trick the user into agreeing, clicking OK and entering a password.
That's not a virus if it requires user interaction to propagate.

Ditto there are sploits and worms that attack OS X servers, but since
OS X servers are fairly rare, so are the sploits. And OS X has a
much-modified FreeBSD userland underneath it, and some of those
componets are vulnerable too.

So it's a bit of a hair-splitting argument.

What it is _not_ is plain marketing lies, such as "Windows NT is a microkernel".

-- 
Liam Proven • Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • GMail/Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven
Skype/MSN: lpro...@hotmail.com • LinkedIn/AIM/Yahoo: liamproven
Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) • +420 702 829 053 (ČR)

Re: Maslin archive "virus"? (Was: Reasonable price for a complete SOL-20 system?

[william degnan]

On Oct 23, 2016 1:13 AM, "Fred Cisin"  wrote:
>
> On Sat, 22 Oct 2016, Eric Christopherson wrote:
>>
>> Where is this image? I found what I think is the Maslin archive at
>> http://www.retroarchive.org/maslin/ but I don't see any Sharp stuff
>> there.
>
>
>
> http://www.vcfed.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-34683.html
> includes a post:
>
> MasawVx
> July 30th, 2014, 08:59 PM
> beware!!!
> there are 3 viruses detected on the archive. i scanned it using f-prot
windows.
> [Found virus] 
C:\AARDVARK_Tape_Backups\25jul96\sydex\dos\pc-7000.td0->(TeleDisk)
> [Found virus] 
C:\AARDVARK_Tape_Backups\maslin_c_d_10apr97\ddrive
\sydex\dos\pc-7000.td0->(TeleDisk)
> [Found virus] 
C:\AARDVARK_Tape_Backups\maslin_c_d_3oct95\ddrive\
sydex\dos\pc-7000.td0->(TeleDisk)
>
>

Yup that was me.  It would be easy enough for anyone with this archive to
locate the above referenced files and clean them out.

I don't have the cleaned Maslin archive on my site but I could post.  I
think I took it down after a while.  Don't remember.  My site is not geared
to be an all inclusive archive for things like that.

Bill Degnan
twitter: billdeg
vintagecomputer.net

ASTEC 8151 PSU (TRS80, Osborne etc)

[Adrian Graham]

Hi folks,

Now that the bouncing has calmed down I've got a question about this here
triple output pretty ubiquitous power supply. This one had some burst caps
so naturally wasn't working and was probably why the machine it came out of
was taken out of use.

I've replaced all of them because why not, along with the .1uF mains
filtering cap that would also burst at some point and I still get low output
on all rails. I've tested all the major components out of circuit and
checked for shorts; in Apple ][ power supplies (also Astec, apart from the
ones that aren't) low output is mostly caused by a feedback capacitor (C7)
going out of spec, but these are all new and as close a match to the
originals I could find.

One thing I've not done is reflowed all connections so I'll do that later,
but has anyone got experience of common failure modes with these things?

Cheers

-- 
Adrian/Witchy
Binary Dinosaurs creator/curator
Www.binarydinosaurs.co.uk - the UK's biggest private home computer
collection?

Re: OT: Excessive bounce notices?

[Adrian Stoness]

I got one still getting emails weird

On Oct 23, 2016 12:55 AM, "Brad H" 
wrote:

>
>
> I get hit by that every couple of weeks.  I still have no idea what a
> 'bounce' is or what I'm doing or not doing to cause it to drop me.  Kind of
> frustrating because it just drops me and then I miss chunks of
> conversations I'm watching.
>
>
> Sent from my Samsung device
>
>  Original message 
> From: Curious Marc 
> Date: 2016-10-22  2:42 PM  (GMT-08:00)
> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> Subject: Re: OT: Excessive bounce notices?
>
> Got the excess bounce warning and membership disabled too. Just clicked
> the link on the message to re-enable myself. Hopefully it worked, since I'm
> still here...
> Marc
>
> > On Oct 22, 2016, at 9:22 AM, Liam Proven  wrote:
> >
> >> On 22 October 2016 at 17:27, Adrian Graham <
> wit...@binarydinosaurs.co.uk> wrote:
> >> Ditto, and ditto. I also thought it was due to the dyndns attack so just
> >> resubbed after emailing Jay, but if everyone did that who got an
> excessive
> >> bounce message the poor chap will have quite a full inbox.
> >
> > Yes, me too.
> >
> > --
> > Liam Proven • Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
> > Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • GMail/Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven
> > Skype/MSN: lpro...@hotmail.com • LinkedIn/AIM/Yahoo: liamproven
> > Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) • +420 702 829 053 (ČR)
>

Re: Time to get rid of weird connected appliances! <> check this

[Guy Dawson]

It's not so much an attack on IoT as with IoT. The worm's ( assuming a
compromised IoT device is used to compromise others - I'm not sure about
this) job is to make IoT devices available to a control system so that IoT
devices can be used to generate the loads needed in DDOS attacks.

The attackers would rather you did not know your IoT devices were
compromised as that way you'll leave them connected to the Internet and
under their control.


On 23 October 2016 at 08:08, jim stephens  wrote:

>
>
> On 10/22/2016 11:17 PM, couryho...@aol.com wrote:
>
>>   Time to get rid of weird  connected appliances!  <>
>> check  this
>> http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/how-your-dvr-was-hi
>> jacked-to-help-epic-cyberattack/ar-AAjh8Yr?ocid=mailsignout
>>
> I wish that writers had a clue what IoT is and what that means.  I have no
> network connected devices of this source facing the open net.  All of the
> premises equipment supplied by the internet, tv, and phone provider, are on
> their own 10 net, and isolated from any connection to the internet.  If
> they are corrupted, fun, but not going to get to the internet.
>
> This is a worm from what I see, and it does target network connected
> devices, but it doesn't attack what is currently bounced around as IoT.  I
> suppose if you want to call every network enlightened device out the
> including ones developed before the IoT of the last couple of years came
> into existence then okay.
>
> I know this is a bit new for the list, but the concept of having embedded
> or other network controls on devices is not.
>
> I'll be interested to see what sort of attack is implemented by this, but
> this worm attack is more like the Morris attack of years ago than an attack
> on IoT.  That will come, but will have very different symptoms.
>
> If you have a wireless controlled remote "cloud" device say a colored LED
> light bulb, while you are watching  TV some nite, loaded and not sure what
> is going on, your LED light will start changing and putting out fun colors
> and other patterns, and you will wonder if your latest pot maybe had a bit
> of acid added to it.
>
> Thanks
> Jim
>



-- 
4.4 > 5.4

Re: Time to get rid of weird connected appliances! <> check this

[jim stephens]

On 10/22/2016 11:17 PM, couryho...@aol.com wrote:
  
Time to get rid of weird  connected appliances!  <>

check  this
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/how-your-dvr-was-hijacked-to-help-epic-cyberattack/ar-AAjh8Yr?ocid=mailsignout
I wish that writers had a clue what IoT is and what that means.  I have 
no network connected devices of this source facing the open net.  All of 
the premises equipment supplied by the internet, tv, and phone provider, 
are on their own 10 net, and isolated from any connection to the 
internet.  If they are corrupted, fun, but not going to get to the internet.


This is a worm from what I see, and it does target network connected 
devices, but it doesn't attack what is currently bounced around as IoT.  
I suppose if you want to call every network enlightened device out the 
including ones developed before the IoT of the last couple of years came 
into existence then okay.


I know this is a bit new for the list, but the concept of having 
embedded or other network controls on devices is not.


I'll be interested to see what sort of attack is implemented by this, 
but this worm attack is more like the Morris attack of years ago than an 
attack on IoT.  That will come, but will have very different symptoms.


If you have a wireless controlled remote "cloud" device say a colored 
LED light bulb, while you are watching  TV some nite, loaded and not 
sure what is going on, your LED light will start changing and putting 
out fun colors and other patterns, and you will wonder if your latest 
pot maybe had a bit of acid added to it.


Thanks
Jim

Time to get rid of weird connected appliances! <> check this

[COURYHOUSE]

 
Time to get rid of weird  connected appliances!  <>   
check  this  
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/how-your-dvr-was-hijacked-to-help-epic-cyberattack/ar-AAjh8Yr?ocid=mailsignout