> I suspect the skill set/clue of RH users is at least an order
> higher that windows users.
really, based on experience that would be surprising, rh is now so easy to get
and install, securing it is still problematic for most users
> The main problem I see is many e-mail readers default to hav
On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 08:40:52PM -0800, Donovan Hill wrote:
> On Wednesday 28 January 2004 07:19 pm, bill wrote:
>
> > "B" will continue to answer on -BOTH- addresses for at least
> > 24 months. Even so, we encourage ISPs and DNS admins to make
> > the changes at their earliest oppo
> Vivien M. wrote:
> Someone made the argument to me privately that the
> problem is that MS lets you run attachments from
> Outlook, while other clients would require you to
> save the files to disk. That's not a solution: if
> these people are like my parents used to be, they'd
> dutifully save
At 08:40 PM 28-01-04 -0800, Donovan Hill wrote:
On Wednesday 28 January 2004 07:19 pm, bill wrote:
> "B" will continue to answer on -BOTH- addresses for at least
> 24 months. Even so, we encourage ISPs and DNS admins to make
> the changes at their earliest opportunity. That wil
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Roger Marquis
> Sent: January 28, 2004 11:31 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail
> worm released today
>
> > The reason they don't do it is
> b
On Wednesday 28 January 2004 07:19 pm, bill wrote:
> "B" will continue to answer on -BOTH- addresses for at least
> 24 months. Even so, we encourage ISPs and DNS admins to make
> the changes at their earliest opportunity. That will leave the
> "tail" to clean up after tho
:But they've never had a sonet outage once in our entire time of doing
:business with them. So they do employ competent people. Plenty of them.
:But they aren't concerned with IP or SMTP.
Absolutely. Without delving into regulatory details, prior to the
initiation of VADI (possibly the most egre
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Vivien M. wrote:
> And, care to tell me why, as someone else pointed out, if I were to switch
> to Evolution on your random GNU/Linux distribution, someone couldn't write a
> similar worm.
Rhetorical questions illustrate a lack of technical rational, thanks.
But do re-read th
At 11:05 PM 1/28/2004 -0500, Vivien M. wrote:
Let me put it this way: if you know one bank has 100 million dollars in the
vault, and another has 5000 dollars, wouldn't you expect most of the bank
robbers to focus on robbing the first bank, irrelevant of whether the first
bank's fault is better prot
Andy Dills wrote:
Verizon? Colo? ISP?
Probably should have expressed that more clearly. Not colo'ing at
Verizon, but an Internet colocation facility that also provides it's
customers with T1 and Frame Relay connectivity to the Internet.
But they've never had a sonet outage once in our entir
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Roger Marquis
> Sent: January 28, 2004 10:37 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: in case nobody else noticed it, there was a mail
> worm released today
>
>
> > (Note: I really do not want this
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Bob Snyder wrote:
>
> Andy Dills wrote:
>
> >Getting Verizon to do anything involving the internet, even if you possess
> >the phone number of the department to call, is impossible. They do a good
> >job with circuits. They do an abysmal job with IP and related issues.
> >
>
Scott Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've been wondering lately, after about 10 years of email worms spreading in
> exactly the same manner with every incarnation ... why do you think people
> haven't learned not to open unexpected attachments yet?
Blaming it on end users is one way to look
Andy Dills wrote:
Getting Verizon to do anything involving the internet, even if you possess
the phone number of the department to call, is impossible. They do a good
job with circuits. They do an abysmal job with IP and related issues.
This must be a different Verizon than I dealt with at a co
> On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Coppola, Brian wrote:
> > In preparation for tomorrow morning's B-root IP change from 128.9.0.107 to
> > 192.228.79.201 we have posted updated root hints files. They are available
> > from the following URLs:
>
> sean.donalen sez:
> Network operators using "golden networks"
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Coppola, Brian wrote:
> In preparation for tomorrow morning's B-root IP change from 128.9.0.107 to
> 192.228.79.201 we have posted updated root hints files. They are available
> from the following URLs:
The previous change to the root hints was November 5 2002. The previous
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> james
> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 4:02 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Misplaced flamewar... WAS: RE: in case nobody else noticed
> it, there was a mail worm released today
>
>
>
In preparation for tomorrow morning's B-root IP change from 128.9.0.107 to
192.228.79.201 we have posted updated root hints files. They are available
from the following URLs:
ftp://rs.internic.net/domain/db.cache
ftp://rs.internic.net/domain/named.cache
ftp://rs.ineterni
Curtis Maurand [1/29/2004 4:21 AM] :
Can someone from verizon.net contact me re: mail delivery troubles off
list please? I'm relaying mail for a particular person in one of my
hosted domains who is a verizon.net customer and all I'm getting is
errors. I accept mail, process it for spam and vi
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Curtis Maurand wrote:
>
> Can someone from verizon.net contact me re: mail delivery troubles off
> list please? I'm relaying mail for a particular person in one of my
> hosted domains who is a verizon.net customer and all I'm getting is
> errors. I accept mail, process it fo
Can someone from verizon.net contact me re: mail delivery troubles off
list please? I'm relaying mail for a particular person in one of my
hosted domains who is a verizon.net customer and all I'm getting is
errors. I accept mail, process it for spam and viruses and then
forward it to verizon
: What's that got to do with today?
I might be reaching here, but I understand some people never upgrade or patch.
>>: Also, for reference to other people - the preview pane does *not*
>>allow
>>: the execution of attachments unless they're double-clicked on and
>>: acknowledged. Again - we're not talking about another OS or Outlook
>>: exploit, only a stupid user exploit.
>The "feature" has been fixed but
: Also, for reference to other people - the preview pane does *not* allow
: the execution of attachments unless they're double-clicked on and
: acknowledged. Again - we're not talking about another OS or Outlook
: exploit, only a stupid user exploit.
The "feature" has been fixed but it **did** a
On Wednesday 28 January 2004 08:37, Dave Temkin wrote:
>> So? Had the virii been an application compiled for RedHat and
>> everyone ran RedHat instead of Windows and they downloaded it using
>> Evolution and double clicked on it, it would suddenly be RH's fault
>> instead of MIcrosoft's?
>If Re
On Wednesday 28 January 2004 08:37, Dave Temkin wrote:
>> So? Had the virii been an application compiled for RedHat and
>> everyone ran RedHat instead of Windows and they downloaded it using
>> Evolution and double clicked on it, it would suddenly be RH's fault
>> instead of MIcrosoft's?
>If R
Unfortunately, Microsoft products seem to have a default which is set to hide
file extensions and to make it very difficult to see 'multiple extensions' like
the '.doc.pif' in the current worm, it is somewhat easier to dress
a vampire in gerbil clothing in these systems than in others.
--
-=[L]=
On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 12:07:36PM -0500, Patrick W.Gilmore said something to the
effect of:
>
> On Jan 28, 2004, at 11:56 AM, james wrote:
> Not sure why that is the case. Web browsers know better than to
> execute things, or at least to execute them in a sandbox, and there
> seems to be muc
RedHAT do not allow to run an attachment, even if attachment wish to be
runned - it uses 'x' flag which is not attachment's attribute. Linus useers
are niot Administrator's, so virus can not infect the whole system,... Etc
etc
(Why RedHAT? It is the worst Lunux amongs all. Use SuSe or Mandrak
On Jan 28, 2004, at 11:56 AM, james wrote:
: So? Had the virii been an application compiled for RedHat and
: everyone ran RedHat instead of Windows and they downloaded it using
: Evolution and double clicked on it, it would suddenly be RH's fault
: instead of MIcrosoft's?
I suspect the skill set/
It's not completely the fault of anything except the end-user. It's like
the Jimmy Buffet song says:
Evolution is mean, there's no dumbass vaccine
scott
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Dave Temkin wrote:
: >>> : They rate of it is quite surprising. By the description, the trick
: >>>
Thanks to Ram (as always ;-)), Dan, Etaoin (where's my Linotype?), Carl,
and Doug. If this much clue doesn't free the grad student's list and its
clutter in a few days I'll ask again.
: So? Had the virii been an application compiled for RedHat and
: everyone ran RedHat instead of Windows and they downloaded it using
: Evolution and double clicked on it, it would suddenly be RH's fault
: instead of MIcrosoft's?
I suspect the skill set/clue of RH users is at least an order
hig
Dave Temkin wrote:
So? Had the virii been an application compiled for RedHat and
everyone ran RedHat instead of Windows and they downloaded it using
Evolution and double clicked on it, it would suddenly be RH's fault
instead of MIcrosoft's? Or is it sendmail's fault because it was
listening on p
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> : They rate of it is quite surprising. By the description, the trick
>>> /
>>> : method of infection does not seem all that different than past worms
>>> : viri. Makes me wonder how many people in a room would reach into
>>their
>>> : purse/pocket on hearing, "Wallet inspector"
At 07:17 AM 1/28/2004 -0800, Scott Francis wrote:
I've been wondering lately, after about 10 years of email worms spreading in
exactly the same manner with every incarnation ... why do you think people
haven't learned not to open unexpected attachments yet? It would seem to me
that even the most cl
Anyone heard/seen press coverage that labeled it "A Microsoft worm"
vice "computer worm.."???
NPR, nyet; pcworld.com, nyet; NYT, nyet.
WashPost buried it 75% of the way in:
The virus was written to run on Windows software, and the
worm could not be launched by users of other ope
When you stop by the registration desk at NANOG30, there will
be colored stickers available for your nametag that indicate if you
have an interest in signing PGP keys. If people keep trying to peer with
you, you've picked up the wrong color sticker and should go back.
Additional
>I've been wondering lately, after about 10 years of email worms spreading in
>exactly the same manner with every incarnation ... why do you think people
>haven't learned not to open unexpected attachments yet? It would seem to me
>that even the most clueless user would modify his/her behavior aft
On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 09:00:40PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>
>
> We are seeing 2 wide spread worms right now, mydoom and dumaru.*
>
> NAI has info at
>
> http://vil.nai.com/vil/content/v_100983.htm
>
> and
>
> http://vil.nai.com/vil/content/v_100980.htm
>
> They rate of it is quite su
A friend of mine died suddenly over the holidays, his bio is here
http://triballaw.wabanaki.net/archives/30.html
He had some lists hosted by Yahoo, a native grad student list in
particular, which I'm informed by someone who should be next as
its manager, is no longer accessible.
Basically, I
What about using byte intervals to BEEFDEAD its space in memory ;~)
Scott C. McGrath
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Adam Maloney wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2004-01-28 at 00:12, Jay Hennigan wrote:
> > I have an AT&T T-1 taking errors. Their trouble reporting number dumps
> > me into
On Wed, 2004-01-28 at 00:12, Jay Hennigan wrote:
> I have an AT&T T-1 taking errors. Their trouble reporting number dumps
> me into the IVR from hell. It even has machines calling me back at
> intervals with status. The status says "A test was run..." No hint as to
> the results of the test.
>
Hi Anton,
I suppose its to be expected that smaller blocks will flap more than larger
ones if you consider that if I have a /8 I'm likely injecting the /8 into BGP
from a lot of core routers and so its unlikely that I'll have a problem which
takes out enough routers for my route to withdraw, b
>
>
>
> : They rate of it is quite surprising. By the description, the trick /
> : method of infection does not seem all that different than past worms
> : viri. Makes me wonder how many people in a room would reach into their
> : purse/pocket on hearing, "Wallet inspector"
>
>
> Every sin
45 matches
Mail list logo
