Re: Matt's Scripts

Robin Szemeti wrote: > of course if you _did_ want to discover a users password its > not that hard .. there are ways ... I believe we have some > world renowned experts on the topic at hand ... now where is > 'merlin' when you need him :) ITYM 'merlyn' (or 'q[merlyn]'). HTH. HAND. Cheers, Ph

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 03:16:17PM +, David Cantrell wrote: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 12:46:45PM +, Jon Eyre wrote: > > > oops... > > Heh. Just remember, Evil Dave is the paranoid nutcase, Dave Cross is the > one with the gold-plated cat. I wonder what that leaves me with. On the oth

RE: Mailing list details

Title: RE: Mailing list details >> I was looking for the mailing list subscription details on our >> london.pm.org website, and thought they were a bit hidden down on >> the "what we've done" page. I think they should probably be more >> prominent, probably on the home page. Or are we tryin

Re: London.pm List Weekly Summary 2001-03-12

On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 06:19:54PM +, Michael Stevens wrote: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 06:18:09PM +, Simon Cozens wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 06:02:04PM +, Leon Brocard wrote: > > > a picture of him drinking a beer from the London.pm website. > > Misparse! Misparse! Misparse!

Re: London.pm List Weekly Summary 2001-03-12

On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 09:39:12PM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: >* David Cantrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 06:19:54PM +, Michael Stevens wrote: >> > Content-type: matter-transport/beer-stream >> Isn't that what happens in the bogs of Penderels Oak? >Is it just me w

Re: London.pm List Weekly Summary 2001-03-12

* David Cantrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 06:19:54PM +, Michael Stevens wrote: > > > Content-type: matter-transport/beer-stream > > Isn't that what happens in the bogs of Penderels Oak? > Is it just me who has noticed the similarities between the bogs of Pendere

Re: Re[2]: Matt's Scripts

* Mike Jarvis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > And don't even get her started on child proof caps. > yeah, tell me about it - those things are impossible to get open! -- Greg McCarroll http://www.mccarroll.uklinux.net

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 06:44:55PM +, Robin Szemeti wrote: > I dont have a problem with scp .. but I can see it would annoy the drag > and drop brigade ... it works for me and I script those batch transfers > and site updates anyway .. I keep meaning to look at rsync over an ssh > tunnel but

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 06:28:03PM +, Robin Szemeti wrote: > On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, you wrote: > > > That's a matter of setting policy. If there's no policy in place to > > prevent that, then you can expect people to do it. If you have a security > > policy which states that you will fire peo

Re: London.pm List Weekly Summary 2001-03-12

On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 06:19:54PM +, Michael Stevens wrote: > Content-type: matter-transport/beer-stream Isn't that what happens in the bogs of Penderels Oak? -- David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/ This is a signature. There are many like it but th

Re[2]: Matt's Scripts

Wednesday, March 14, 2001, 1:55:03 PM, Robin wrote: RS> there is a rather good ISP on Hawaii that plainly states 'the service is RS> not suitable for clueless users' .. ring em up and ask too many docile RS> questions and they pull your account .. My gfriend in pharmacy school plans on having a

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, you wrote: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 04:10:02PM +, David Cantrell wrote: > > WebDAV is not OK, cos it means installing yet more stuff on the server > > which is simply not needed. If a user can't use scp, then I don't want > > that user. I mean, it's not hard FFS. > > A

RE: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, you wrote: > Scp is not hard. Users should be able to use scp. However, the real point is > that scp sucks. scp is to a sensible way of transfering files what > command.com is to a good shell. scp is stateless. > scp makes you enter your > password, again, all the time. e

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, you wrote: > > Yes there is. http://www.i-tree.org/ixplorer.htm. > > I've since installed WinSCP, from the list of alternatives on OpenSSH This > is also based on PuTTY and isn't so, well, dodgy as iXplorer. Forget I > ever mentioned it. Terraterm and TTSSH are what I hav

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, you wrote: > enough people find moving/copying files on windows complex... when > you start introducing a second computer... hmmm I wouldn't place such creatures as far up the food chain as 'people' .. but I know what you mean. -- Robin Szemeti The box said "requires wind

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, you wrote: > > And they just give 'em out. No checks, no confirming with the > > customers, nothing. There's little hope of > > securing stuff if people can be socially > > engineered so easily. > > That's a matter of setting policy. If there's no policy in place to > pre

Re: London.pm List Weekly Summary 2001-03-12

> Content-type: matter-transport/beer-stream That's not right. MIMEs do type/format (e.g. image/gif.) So it'd more likely be: Content-type: beer/guinness Later. Mark. -- print "\n",map{my$a="\n"if(length$_>6);' 'x(36-length($_)/2)."$_\n$a"} ( Name => 'Mark Fowler',Title => 'Tec

Re: London.pm List Weekly Summary 2001-03-12

> Leo Lapworth was trying to debug something with Devel::DProf and > couldn't understand why BEGIN was called more than once. Robert Price > and Mark Fowler pointed out that 'use Module LIST' is exactly > equivalent to 'BEGIN { require Module; import Module LIST; }', so the > module was being use-

Re: London.pm List Weekly Summary 2001-03-12

On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 06:02:04PM +, Leon Brocard wrote: > a picture of him drinking a beer from the London.pm website. Misparse! Misparse! Misparse! -- We use Linux for all our mission-critical applications. Having the source code means that we are not held hostage by anyone's support d

London.pm List Weekly Summary 2001-03-12

This is the eighth of hopefully many weekly summaries of the London Perl Mongers mailing list. For the somewhat hectic week (we hit more than a hundred messages a day again) starting 2001-03-12: Don't forget the London.pm website for meetings etc. There isn't a technical meeting on Thursday due t

Re: Matt's Scripts

Wednesday, March 14, 2001, 11:34:16 AM, grep wrote: GM> * Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: >> An admirable point of view in my opinion. Why would anyone possibly >> want to run an ISP and have to deal with all the clueless people? GM> Mike J, you used to work for AOL, you should be more th

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 03:50:14PM +, Struan Donald wrote: > * at 14/03 15:22 + Michael Stevens said: > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 04:10:02PM +, David Cantrell wrote: > > > WebDAV is not OK, cos it means installing yet more stuff on the server > > > which is simply not needed. If a use

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Dominic Mitchell wrote: > "In a recent survey, 9 out of 10 MS Windows users were found to have > difficulties maximising and moving their windows. Macintosh users were > not admitted to the tests because they had difficulties with the door > handle at the lab where the t

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 03:22:59PM +, Michael Stevens wrote: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 04:10:02PM +, David Cantrell wrote: > > WebDAV is not OK, cos it means installing yet more stuff on the server > > which is simply not needed. If a user can't use scp, then I don't want > > that user.

Re: Matt's Scripts

* at 14/03 15:22 + Michael Stevens said: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 04:10:02PM +, David Cantrell wrote: > > WebDAV is not OK, cos it means installing yet more stuff on the server > > which is simply not needed. If a user can't use scp, then I don't want > > that user. I mean, it's not har

Scalar Context vs List Context

... and how much trouble you can get in for not knowing the difference: Dave...

Re: Matt's Scripts

* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 16:10:02 +, David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 03:01:17PM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote: > > > > > WebDAV is ok, but you'd need to run it over HTTPS to be secure. > > > > WebDAV is not OK, cos

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote: > WebDAV is not OK, cos it means installing yet more stuff on the server > which is simply not needed. Using WebDAV on a internal staging server and then updating the live server with something rsync-ish using scp might be a good usability/security comp

Re: Matt's Scripts

> Yes there is. http://www.i-tree.org/ixplorer.htm. I've since installed WinSCP, from the list of alternatives on OpenSSH This is also based on PuTTY and isn't so, well, dodgy as iXplorer. Forget I ever mentioned it. Seems to work well for me. The interface is clunky (i.e. you have to press

RE: Matt's Scripts

> which is simply not needed. If a user can't use scp, then I > don't want > that user. I mean, it's not hard FFS. Scp is not hard. Users should be able to use scp. However, the real point is that scp sucks. scp is to a sensible way of transfering files what command.com is to a good shell. scp

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Dave Cross wrote: > At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 16:10:02 +, David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 03:01:17PM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote: > > > WebDAV is ok, but you'd need to run it over HTTPS to be secure. > > WebDAV is not OK, cos it means inst

Re: Matt's Scripts

* at 14/03 14:59 + Mark Fowler said: > > Do what we do. Keep everything running, but shove a whopping great > > ipchains (or firewall of choice) in the way. If you want to access it, > > ssh tunnel it first. Would not ipsec be a better solution? It's transparent to the users, and more rel

Re: Matt's Scripts (SCP)

* Neil Ford ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > >On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:57:41PM +, Roger Burton West wrote: > >> On or about Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:34:32PM +, Jon Eyre typed: > >> > >> >is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows > >> >clients? > >> > >> PuTTY. > > > >SC

Re: Matt's Scripts

At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 16:10:02 +, David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 03:01:17PM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote: > > > WebDAV is ok, but you'd need to run it over HTTPS to be secure. > > WebDAV is not OK, cos it means installing yet more stuff on the server > wh

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 03:13:46PM -, Jonathan Peterson wrote: > > > > There is a GUI front-end for pscp, available from > > http://www.i-tree.org/, apparently, although I haven't tried it. > > This is kind of flakey, and has trouble with stuff like files owned by a > user or group with more

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 03:01:17PM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote: > WebDAV is ok, but you'd need to run it over HTTPS to be secure. WebDAV is not OK, cos it means installing yet more stuff on the server which is simply not needed. If a user can't use scp, then I don't want that user. I mean, i

Re: Matt's Scripts (SCP)

At 03:00 PM 14.3.2001 +, Leo Lapworth wrote: >If anyone hears of a good gui SCP client for non-OSX mac's I'd >really like to know (I've got users on my machine that need it!). Can Fetch do it? At a glance, I don't see anything about SCP there, but then I've only done a cursory check; it may

Re: Matt's Scripts (SCP)

>On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:57:41PM +, Roger Burton West wrote: >> On or about Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:34:32PM +, Jon Eyre typed: >> >> >is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows >> >clients? >> >> PuTTY. > >SCP for Windoz = http://winscp.vse.cz/eng/ >SCP for Linux =

RE: Matt's Scripts

> > There is a GUI front-end for pscp, available from > http://www.i-tree.org/, apparently, although I haven't tried it. This is kind of flakey, and has trouble with stuff like files owned by a user or group with more than 8 characters in its name. This is because it determines filenames by doing

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 03:08:03PM +, Struan Donald wrote: > and people are worrying about plain scp confusing people? ssh > tunneling is one of those things that appears close enough to magic > that people assume it is. damn useful magic though. > > plus it always seems such a pain on window

Re: Matt's Scripts

* Roger Burton West ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On or about Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 04:00:22PM +, Greg McCarroll typed: > >* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > >> They won't if you stop running the ftp daemon on the server :) > >Rule one of security: > > Ensure availability for authoris

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:57:41PM +, Roger Burton West wrote: > On or about Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:34:32PM +, Jon Eyre typed: > >is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows > >clients? > > PuTTY. http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/ In case anybody

Re: Matt's Scripts

* at 14/03 14:59 + Mark Fowler said: > On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote: > > * Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 14:34:32 + (GMT), Jon Eyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >wrote: > > > > > > > > > My several users use scp. > > > > > > > > is there an idiot-pr

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:34:32PM +, Jon Eyre wrote: > > My several users use scp. > > is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows > clients? my several users require them, or they'll just continue > using ftp, because it's *easier*... People are lazy, and security > mea

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Dominic Mitchell wrote: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:55:28PM +, Michael Stevens wrote: > > I've been thinking that, while not ideal, webDAV is probably the best > > option here. I'm told it's a) secure-ish, and b) integrates nicely > > with Dreamweaver and whatever microso

Re: Matt's Scripts (SCP)

On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:57:41PM +, Roger Burton West wrote: > On or about Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:34:32PM +, Jon Eyre typed: > > >is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows > >clients? > > PuTTY. SCP for Windoz = http://winscp.vse.cz/eng/ SCP for Linux = well, com

Re: Matt's Scripts

On or about Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 04:00:22PM +, Greg McCarroll typed: >* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: >> They won't if you stop running the ftp daemon on the server :) >Rule one of security: > Ensure availability for authorised users Rule zero of security: A system with n

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote: > * Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 14:34:32 + (GMT), Jon Eyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > My several users use scp. > > > > > > is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows > > > clients?

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:55:28PM +, Michael Stevens wrote: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:34:32PM +, Jon Eyre wrote: > > > My several users use scp. > > is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows > > clients? my several users require them, or they'll just continue > > u

Re: Matt's Scripts

* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 14:34:32 + (GMT), Jon Eyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > My several users use scp. > > > > is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows > > clients? my several users require them, or they'll just continue

Re: Matt's Scripts

> > is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows? > > On Windows I use pscp which comes from the same people as putty. It > works well, but it doesn't have a pretty graphical front-end. Yes there is. http://www.i-tree.org/ixplorer.htm. I suggest you peeps read http://www.opens

Re: Matt's Scripts

On or about Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:34:32PM +, Jon Eyre typed: >is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows >clients? PuTTY. >my several users require them, or they'll just continue >using ftp, because it's *easier*... People are lazy, and security >measures which are a

Re: Matt's Scripts

At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 14:34:32 + (GMT), Jon Eyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > My several users use scp. > > is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows > clients? my several users require them, or they'll just continue > using ftp, because it's *easier*... They won't i

Re: Matt's Scripts

> My several users use scp. is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows clients? my several users require them, or they'll just continue using ftp, because it's *easier*... People are lazy, and security measures which are a pain in the arse will fail to work because the user

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 12:46:45PM +, Jon Eyre wrote: > oops... Heh. Just remember, Evil Dave is the paranoid nutcase, Dave Cross is the one with the gold-plated cat. > > At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 13:05:05 +, David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Evil Dave's server does *not*

Re: Mailing list details

Dave Cross [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: *> *>Exclusivity! Take a good look round next time you're at a meeting and *>tell me how exclusive you think we are :) *> *>But, yes, I have _lots_ of ideas for a revamp of the web site. I might *>even have time to do it some time this year. There is also a

Re: Mailing list details

At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 12:52:33 -, "Robert Shiels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I was looking for the mailing list subscription details on our > london.pm.org website, and thought they were a bit hidden down on > the "what we've done" page. I think they should probably be more > prominent, pro

Re: Matt's Scripts

oops... On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Dave Cross wrote: > At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 13:05:05 +, David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 11:50:04AM +, Jon Eyre wrote: > > > In my experience, virtually *all* isps/hosting providers use the > > > 'separate cgi-bin directory' c

Mailing list details

I was looking for the mailing list subscription details on our london.pm.org website, and thought they were a bit hidden down on the "what we've done" page. I think they should probably be more prominent, probably on the home page. Or are we trying to maintain our exclusivity :-) -- Robert --

Re: Matt's Scripts

At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 13:05:05 +, David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 11:50:04AM +, Jon Eyre wrote: > > > In my experience, virtually *all* isps/hosting providers use the > > 'separate cgi-bin directory' configuration. either for the > > security reasons ou

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 11:50:04AM +, Jon Eyre wrote: > In my experience, virtually *all* isps/hosting providers use the > 'separate cgi-bin directory' configuration. either for the security > reasons outlined by evil dave ... Eh-hem. Evil Dave's server does *not* use seperate cgi-bin dir

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Mark Fowler wrote: > > (What do you mean with "not-inplace cgi"?) > > Some servers (like my own) are configured to allow you to run perl scripts > anywhere. aka cgi-by-suffix, you add an apache handler which recognises all files with a certain extension (typically .cgi o

Re: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, you wrote: > > (What do you mean with "not-inplace cgi"?) > > Some servers (like my own) are configured to allow you to run perl scripts > anywhere. > > Some servers (especially in the paranoid ISP land) are configured to have > a /cgi-bin/ where you have to put files in tha

Re: Matt's Scripts

At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 11:28:19 + (GMT), Mark Fowler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > (What do you mean with "not-inplace cgi"?) > > Some servers (like my own) are configured to allow you to run perl > scripts anywhere. We _like_ servers configured like this. Especially if they've got some kind

Re: Matt's Scripts

> (What do you mean with "not-inplace cgi"?) Some servers (like my own) are configured to allow you to run perl scripts anywhere. Some servers (especially in the paranoid ISP land) are configured to have a /cgi-bin/ where you have to put files in that will be 'executed'. Typically you cannot r

Re: Matt's Scripts

Mark Fowler wrote: > d) It links to an image in the same directory as itself and > explains that if the image isn't viewable then you do not > have inplace cgi and the things you have to know about this (What do you mean with "not-inplace cgi"?) Another thing it maybe should print out is the cu

Re: Matt's Scripts

At 10:54 14/03/01 +, you wrote: >Mark Fowler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> > >Ooh, 'configure.cgi'. > >If only we could assume that they had a working perl on the box that >they were installing from then we could write a cunning installer >script which uploaded configure.cgi to the ISP a

Re: Matt's Scripts

Mark Fowler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > Stop, stop, this script archive is not ready yet! Where are the Hello > world examples? Where are the detailed instructions? And why are you > actually working on these scripts yet! > > > You're all getting ahead of yourselves. We need t

RE: Matt's Scripts

On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Mark Fowler wrote: > > > > > Stop, stop, this script archive is not ready yet! Where are the Hello > world examples? Where are the detailed instructions? And why are you > actually working on these scripts yet! > *giggle* L.

RE: Matt's Scripts

At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 10:19:42 + (GMT), Mark Fowler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Stop, stop, this script archive is not ready yet! Where are the Hello > world examples? Where are the detailed instructions? And why are you > actually working on these scripts yet! > > > You're all

RE: Matt's Scripts

> Stop, stop, this script archive is not ready yet! Where are the Hello world examples? Where are the detailed instructions? And why are you actually working on these scripts yet! You're all getting ahead of yourselves. We need to write a set of helloWorld scripts that the script user ca