That would probably work, but for style I'd use 'break;' instead of 'i=100;'.
You also don't need to be quite so paranoid with printf, it's generally safe
unless you are printf'ing data entered by the user. If it's all your own
text, they can't insert anything strange into it...
Also, instead
That would probably work, but for style I'd use 'break;' instead of 'i=100;'.
You also don't need to be quite so paranoid with printf, it's generally safe
unless you are printf'ing data entered by the user. If it's all your own
text, they can't insert anything strange into it...
Also, instead
Having a crypto install option (even if it's a little more complex to
get) is still better than not having one.
At this point, all one can do is encrypt a filesystem off of a non-
encrypted root partition. Like removable media or something else that
is mounted by hand. There are some
I assume that is on the ethernet side facing the ISP? Or that you have one
ethernet card and all traffic is going there? Cable modem? (read: shared
media)
My bet would be that someone else is doing NAT as well, and you are seeing
their packets too (probably because they are using only one
You could just recompile it yourself. I don't even use any of the Debian
SSH packages anymore, they are mostly out-of-date anyway. The current
SSH2 in woody is 2.0.13, for example. I just download the source and
compile it myself for those kind of things.
There's another good point to that:
You could just recompile it yourself. I don't even use any of the Debian
SSH packages anymore, they are mostly out-of-date anyway. The current
SSH2 in woody is 2.0.13, for example. I just download the source and
compile it myself for those kind of things.
There's another good point to that:
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, Peter Cordes wrote:
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 11:10:39AM -0800, Micah Anderson wrote:
We are currently running woody on a production machine (yes, I am not that
happy about that decision). Woody does not get potato's security updates,
and does not get new unstable
Well, finger is probably running through inetd... Either that or you
are running that scanner detecter package that binds to every port
known in the universe.
Aaron
On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, Matthias G. Imhof wrote:
Performing strobe or nmap on my system, I get, e.g., the following list:
Well, finger is probably running through inetd... Either that or you
are running that scanner detecter package that binds to every port
known in the universe.
Aaron
On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, Matthias G. Imhof wrote:
Performing strobe or nmap on my system, I get, e.g., the following list:
79/tcp
Yes, the best policy is always to disable anything on your machine that
you're not using. Those you _are_ using, you then filter the crap out of.
Personally, my workstation-type machines only listen on port 6000 (X), 22
(ssh), and occasionally ftp and tftp if I need them for a specific
10 matches
Mail list logo
