- Legacy - lists.gtalug.org

SOT: shitfs in spam trends and topics
by hughreilly1-PkbjNfxxIARBDgjK7y7TUQ＠public.gmane.org 05 Dec '03

05 Dec '03

>From: Matthew Rice <matt-s/rLXaiAEBtBDgjK7y7TUQ at public.gmane.org> >Are you suggesting that we are receiving unintelligible e-mail because some >group [terrorists, fbi, cia, csis] are trying to send messages to each >other. Do you supposed that they are sending a lot of them and getting the >e-mail addresses wrong or that they are sending a lot of them to confuse >the >trail to the intended recipient? > >If you were to ask me, I'd say that this is similar to the book _Snow >Crash_. >Microsoft is sending out these seemingly unintelligible e-mails and anyone >that looks at them has their brain 're-wired' into liking M$. > > "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that they aren't out > to get you." A couple of notes to feed the paranoia: 1. One of my jobs is to handle incoming customer email at the Toronto Sun. Of course, 90%+ is spam. Many of these messages contain "nonsense" verbiage, I think designed to outfox spam blocking. But reading this "nonsense" can often give the impression that the creator is not operating in a strictly mercantile role. 2. A few years ago, I presented a paper at the McLuhan Program on the "Information Ecology", wherein I described how the emerging Internet was a radically decentralizing force which was undermining traditional power structures, and that disrupting the Internet was a logical strategy for maintaining traditional power base. It seems the spam epidemic is certainly undermining the value of email. For example, I now tell Sun customers that "just because you sent the email is no guarantee that we received the email". If spam blocking becomes the norm, we can expect that 5% +/- of legitimate emails just won't get through. -Hugh _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoi… -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

C considered harmful: was Debian attacker may have used new exploit
by cbbrowne-HInyCGIudOg＠public.gmane.org 05 Dec '03

05 Dec '03

> On December 4, 2003 12:56 pm, Marcus Brubaker wrote: > > > > You might find this article, by one of the LISP community's greats, both > > > interesting and on topic: > > > > > > http://www.paulgraham.com/javacover.html > > > > To each their own opinion but if you want to do OOP then there really > > isn't a better language out there than Java. > > Do people write real software with java or is still just web stuff? How do you define "real"? The actual successes with Java have been with "application server" software, which often represents web servers, but also other sorts of server software. The folks I work with have a whole lot of Java server software... -- let name="cbbrowne" and tld="acm.org" in String.concat "@" [name;tld];; http://cbbrowne.com/info/oses.html A Plateau is the highest form of flattery. -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

What to do with kernel panics?
by anton-F0u+EriZ6ihBDgjK7y7TUQ＠public.gmane.org 04 Dec '03

04 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello everyone (again), I just realized these messages have not been going to the list, so I am replying to the list in hope of getting more answers. To add to the messages below, I just opened up my computer and found out that my motherboard is: American Megatrends P4VMM2 The BIOS shows the following serial number at the boot screen: 62-0124-001131-00101111-040201 It has an Award (AMIBIOS) BIOS Thanks in advance. Anton Markov wrote: | Hello Jing Su, | | Following your suggestions here is what I discovered: | | Jing Su wrote: | | I don't have any solid leads or answers for you... but I'll keep asking | | around to see if anyone else I know has any more suggestions to pass to | | you. | Thanks. | | | You shouldn't have any problems compiling the kernel. Especially if | | you're using RH9 (if I recall correctly). Compiling the kernel is | | actually a common test people use to test the stability of an overclocked | | computer. If compiling fails, it usually means that the voltage settings | | aren't stable or the memory isn't keeping up. | I am inclined to think this is the reason. I have noticed that not only | compiling, but other apps too have started randomly crashing. | | I may even know how it happened: after my mother-board was replaced, the | CPU front-side bus was set to 100MHz (1.8GHz CPU). I tried switching | the FSB speed to 133MHz (so it runs at 2.4GHz like it should). | Unfortunately, I didn't know where the DDR jumper was so I went back to | store and had the guy there take a look at it. He changed the DDR speed | and said it's OK now. Maybe he forgot the voltage. | | Where can I get the info about the appropriate voltages for my | CPU/Motherboard. The Motherboard has a VIA everything, and Award bios, | and I am not sure of the actual make. The CPU is a 2.4GHz Pentium 4. | | Here is the output from "sensor" (I've corrected some of the values): | | [anton-zMHcGNhTcHs at public.gmane.org anton]$ sensors | eeprom-i2c-0-50 | Adapter: SMBus Via Pro adapter at 0400 | Algorithm: Non-I2C SMBus adapter | Memory type: DDR SDRAM DIMM | Memory size (MB): 512 | | it87-isa-0290 | Adapter: ISA adapter | Algorithm: ISA algorithm | VCore 1: +1.53 V (min = +1.42 V, max = +1.56 V) | VCore 2: +2.54 V (min = +2.40 V, max = +2.60 V) | +3.3V: +6.68 V (min = +3.12 V, max = +3.44 V) ALARM | (+3.34?) | +5V: +4.94 V (min = +4.72 V, max = +5.24 V) | +12V: +12.00 V (min = +11.36 V, max = +12.60 V) | -12V: -20.61 V (min = -12.63 V, max = -11.41 V) ALARM | -------- (-10.31?) This one worries me. -------------- | -5V: +3.46 V (min = -5.28 V, max = -4.81 V) ALARM | ------- (???) ---------- This one too | Stdby: +5.11 V (min = +4.72 V, max = +5.24 V) | VBat: +3.39 V | fan1: 4623 RPM (min = 0 RPM, div = 2) | fan2: 0 RPM (min = 3000 RPM, div = 2) ALARM | fan3: 0 RPM (min = 3000 RPM, div = 2) ALARM | (fan2 and fan3 work in reality) | Temp1/MB: +37?C (low = +20?C, high = +40?C) | Temp2/CPU: -96?C (low = +25?C, high = +45?C) | (+43?) | Temp3: +75?C (low = +25?C, high = +45?C) | (+33?) | | | | | Have you ever had any previous problems with your memory sticks? | No. | | | | Just to make sure it's not a CPU, Memory, or Motherboard problem, you | | could try underclocking your CPU to something lower than the "vanilla" | | setting. Ensure that the processor has plenty of "error room" to work | | with. Try using these (albeit slower) settings, and try compiling the | | kernel again. If it succeeds this time (or if your computer stops | | crashing), then maybe there is something with your CPU settings you need | | to twiddle. | Come to think of it, the kernel compiled fine when I was running at | 1.7GHz until I tuned it up. | | | Are you using the Binary Only NVIDIA drivers? I experience the freeze | | problem with VT switching to/from X sometimes when using the binary | NVIDIA | | drivers, though I have no problems with resolution switching. | No. I have a Radeon 7000 and use the normal kernel radeon.o module. | The problem is probably the same voltage setting issue. Maybe the | voltage on the AGP bus? I tried going into Windows and switching the | resolutions a few times; seemed to work fine. | | | Do your XFree or Kernel logs show any error messages (looking at them | | after a reboot)? If it's a X or driver crash, maybe the kernel had just | | enough time to log something.... | No. Nothing interesting in either log. Maybe just this one thing in | XFree86.0.log: | | drmOpenDevice: minor is 0 | drmOpenDevice: node name is /dev/dri/card0 | drmOpenDevice: open result is -1, (No such device) | drmOpenDevice: open result is -1, (No such device) | drmOpenDevice: Open failed | drmOpenDevice: minor is 0 | drmOpenDevice: node name is /dev/dri/card0 | drmOpenDevice: open result is -1, (No such device) | drmOpenDevice: open result is -1, (No such device) | drmOpenDevice: Open failed | drmOpenDevice: minor is 0 | drmOpenDevice: node name is /dev/dri/card0 | drmOpenDevice: open result is 8, (OK) | | Seems like it keeps missing the card, although it may just be the delay | from loading the radeon.o module automaticly. | - -- Anton Markov <("anton" + "@" + "truxtar" + "." + "com")> GnuPGP Key fingerprint = 5546 A6E2 1FFB 9BB8 15C3 CE34 46B7 8D93 3AD1 44B4 ~ "The difference between insanity and genius is measured only by success." ~ - Some bad guy from 007 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE/0A59RreNkzrRRLQRAqOjAJ9aFUu/vcsT7ifAKhHDvUWZ9Jlk4ACfUo57 k7zInvdJs4D+oXqRbMRGlfI= =bY/y -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

C considered harmful: was Debian attacker may have used new exploit
by henry-lqW1N6Cllo0sV2N9l4h3zg＠public.gmane.org 04 Dec '03

04 Dec '03

On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Peter Hiscocks wrote: > Interesting examples. Given that any code can be executed by a Turing > machine (albeit somewhat slowly ;), I would bet that it is possible to do > all these things in a way that separates the code and the data (ie, without > generating code on the fly), but possibly not in a way that satisfies the > current speed requirements. Exactly. This is pure performance optimization. But it's a very powerful one which can make a huge difference. > ...it might even become more feasible to avoid what is effectively > 'self modifying code' as processors get faster and memory gets cheaper. Don't forget that the problems grow too. For example, considering the network-routing application, the networks are getting faster at about the same pace as the CPUs, so you don't *get* an advantage by waiting. Henry Spencer henry-lqW1N6Cllo0sV2N9l4h3zg at public.gmane.org -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

C considered harmful: was Debian attacker may have used new exploit
by phiscock-g851W1bGYuGnS0EtXVNi6w＠public.gmane.org 04 Dec '03

04 Dec '03

Interesting examples. Given that any code can be executed by a Turing machine (albeit somewhat slowly ;), I would bet that it is possible to do all these things in a way that separates the code and the data (ie, without generating code on the fly), but possibly not in a way that satisfies the current speed requirements. Or it might be that these approaches were taken at a time when this was the only way to get the necessary speed. So in the long run, it might even become more feasible to avoid what is effectively 'self modifying code' as processors get faster and memory gets cheaper. Peter On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 08:20:56PM -0500, Henry Spencer wrote: > It's highly desirable in cases where performance is critical and there are > too many different cases to just include one of each in a precompiled > binary. The classic example is Rob Pike's dynamically-compiled > implementation of RasterOp -- operations on one-bit-deep frame buffers -- > where the number of cases is the product of a dozen different variables > each with several values. Similar things can be done for applications > like network routing. > > Similarly, it's heavily used for implementing languages whose full > generality must be interpretive, but for which special cases can be > identified at run time and compiled into hard code. > > > Isn't it much safer to have a rigid demarcation between code generation and > > code execution? > > Safer, but less powerful. > > Henry Spencer > henry-lqW1N6Cllo0sV2N9l4h3zg at public.gmane.org > > -- > The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org > TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns > How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml -- Peter D. Hiscocks Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Ryerson University, 350 Victoria Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5B 2K3, Canada Phone: (416) 979-5000 Ext 6109 Fax: (416) 979-5280 Email: phiscock-g851W1bGYuGnS0EtXVNi6w at public.gmane.org URL: http://www.ee.ryerson.ca/~phiscock -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

OOP, Was: C considered harmful: was Debian attacker may have used new exploit
by rgfranks-cmaem7PIVQT44Nm34jS7GywD8/FfD2ys＠public.gmane.org 04 Dec '03

04 Dec '03

>>>>> "Peter" == Peter L Peres <plp-ysDPMY98cNQDDBjDh4tngg at public.gmane.org> writes: Peter> On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Greg Franks wrote: >> >>>>> "Marcus" == Marcus Brubaker <marcus.brubaker-H217xnMUJC0sA/PxXw9srA at public.gmane.org> >> writes: Marcus> To each their own opinion but if you want to do OOP then Marcus> there really isn't a better language out there than Java. >> You forgot Smalltalk. Everything is an object, even integers. Peter> Yes, and the processing overhead for an addition is about Peter> the same as for a square root extraction. You're thinking of an old smalltalk (or bad implementation perhaps...). The interpreter should do somthing like... if ( x & 8000000 ) { its an integer... } else { its an object... } Otoh, sqrt() isn't as pokey as it used to be either :-) -- __@ Greg Franks <| _~@ __O _`\<,_ Ottawa, Ontario, Canada |O\ -^\<;^\<, (*)/ (*) (*)--(*)%---/(*) "Where do you want to go today?" Outside. -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

C considered harmful: was Debian attacker may have used new exploit
by marcus.brubaker-H217xnMUJC0sA/PxXw9srA＠public.gmane.org 04 Dec '03

04 Dec '03

On Thu, 2003-12-04 at 19:36, Fraser Campbell wrote: > On December 4, 2003 12:56 pm, Marcus Brubaker wrote: > > > > You might find this article, by one of the LISP community's greats, both > > > interesting and on topic: > > > > > > http://www.paulgraham.com/javacover.html > > > > To each their own opinion but if you want to do OOP then there really > > isn't a better language out there than Java. > > Do people write real software with java or is still just web stuff? Absolutely. I've written a number of "real" projects in Java. Further, I use a number of applications that are written in Java. (E.G. PCGen) -- Marcus Brubaker <marcus.brubaker-H217xnMUJC0sA/PxXw9srA at public.gmane.org> -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

C considered harmful
by henry-lqW1N6Cllo0sV2N9l4h3zg＠public.gmane.org 04 Dec '03

04 Dec '03

On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Peter Hiscocks wrote: > So, it is an interesting challenge to the language writers to create > something that has the power of the C language and still does (say) > automatic checking of array bounds. It's not that hard, if that is all you want. In particular, if you work in C++ and *always* use its library string and vector types (which have built-in bounds checks in many implementations) rather than C arrays, the problem is more or less solved. If one finds C++ unappealing, which is certainly a defensible position :-), then there's more of a problem. Henry Spencer henry-lqW1N6Cllo0sV2N9l4h3zg at public.gmane.org -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

C considered harmful: was Debian attacker may have used new exploit
by henry-lqW1N6Cllo0sV2N9l4h3zg＠public.gmane.org 04 Dec '03

04 Dec '03

On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Peter Hiscocks wrote: > Dynamic code generation (program writes code then jumps to it) sounds like a > really useful facility for virus writers, trojan horses and worms. In what > circumstance is it necessary to have that capability? It's highly desirable in cases where performance is critical and there are too many different cases to just include one of each in a precompiled binary. The classic example is Rob Pike's dynamically-compiled implementation of RasterOp -- operations on one-bit-deep frame buffers -- where the number of cases is the product of a dozen different variables each with several values. Similar things can be done for applications like network routing. Similarly, it's heavily used for implementing languages whose full generality must be interpretive, but for which special cases can be identified at run time and compiled into hard code. > Isn't it much safer to have a rigid demarcation between code generation and > code execution? Safer, but less powerful. Henry Spencer henry-lqW1N6Cllo0sV2N9l4h3zg at public.gmane.org -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

C considered harmful: was Debian attacker may have used new exploit
by tim-s/rLXaiAEBtBDgjK7y7TUQ＠public.gmane.org 04 Dec '03

04 Dec '03

Jing Su <jingsu-26n5VD7DAF2Tm46uYYfjYg at public.gmane.org> writes: > > Dynamic code generation (program writes code then jumps to it) sounds like a > > really useful facility for virus writers, trojan horses and worms. In what > > circumstance is it necessary to have that capability? > > Dynamic run-time optimization. Hot field of research (though I know > nothing about it). That's one area. Decent LISP environments often blur the distinction between interpreted code, byte compiled code (to be executed by a virtual machine), and compiled code (i.e. machine language). Such environments allow you to integrate interpreted code with compiled code as well as compiling (with varying levels of optimization) individual functions. I'm sure other languages have similar environments. These tools can really enhance productivity as they facilitate rapid development by eliminating the compile/link/run cycle without sacrificing performance. And they tend to have great debugging facilities. Of course, you arguably don't need these facilities in "production code". So it wouldn't be too onerous to restrict this ability (to compile and execute code on-the-fly) to specific, privileged binaries via capabilities. -- tim writer <tim-s/rLXaiAEBtBDgjK7y7TUQ at public.gmane.org> starnix inc. 905.771.0017 ext. 225 thornhill, ontario, canada http://www.starnix.com professional linux services & products -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0