Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #88234 > unrolled thread

Re: Network Pinger Stats.... Inadequate Management & Omissions...???

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Network Pinger Stats.... Inadequate Management & Omissions...??? Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2016-01-30 23:38 +0100
    Re: Network Pinger Stats.... Inadequate Management & Omissions...??? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-01-30 23:29 +0000
    Re: Network Pinger Stats.... Inadequate Management & Omissions...??? Wolffan <AKWolffan@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 23:27 -0500
      Re: Network Pinger Stats.... Inadequate Management & Omissions...??? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-01-31 04:42 +0000
        Re: Network Pinger Stats.... Inadequate Management & Omissions...??? Wolffan <AKWolffan@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 07:23 -0500
        Re: Network Pinger Stats.... Inadequate Management & Omissions...??? Anonymous <anonymous@hoi-polloi.org> - 2016-02-01 03:12 +0100
          Re: Network Pinger Stats.... Inadequate Management & Omissions...??? Wolffan <AKWolffan@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 23:05 -0500
            Re: Network Pinger Stats.... Inadequate Management & Omissions...??? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-02-01 17:16 +0000
            Re: Network Pinger Stats.... Inadequate Management & Omissions...??? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-02-06 19:04 +1300
          Re: Network Pinger Stats.... Inadequate Management & Omissions...??? Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201602.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2016-02-02 01:44 +0100
            Re: Network Pinger Stats.... Inadequate Management & Omissions...??? Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-02-01 17:23 -0800
              Re: Network Pinger Stats.... Inadequate Management & Omissions...??? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-02-01 20:26 -0500

#88234 — Re: Network Pinger Stats.... Inadequate Management & Omissions...???

In article <cc7409e2bd67c7b03f55ff88409257d5@anemone.mooo.com>
Jeremy Bentham <nobody@anemone.mooo.com> wrote:
>
> Zax <admin@mixmin.net> wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 30 Jan 2016 13:35:27 +0000 (GMT), Nathan Hale wrote in
> >Message-Id: <ed3305582ef1759b6f18befdd10e839f@remailer.org.uk>:
> >
> >>   Something that entails a much greater problem is intels possibly
> >>   breaking into remailer servers and confiscating the remailer keys.
> >>   Zax's is probably the only remailer that has some kind of key
> >>   encryption onboard his servers.  Wish there was some kind of info on
> >>   how to implement this.  Other than that, you would probably need to
> >>   completely lock down you Linux, allowing only remailers in.
> >
> >I put my remailer keys on an encrypted disc which is mounted with a
> >random key.  Reboot the server and the keys are lost.  Gaining access to
> >the Linux filesystem is easy if the server is rebooted into single-user
> >mode.  Any encrypted filesystem protects against that issue but the
> >random key makes it pretty obvious that coercion isn't going to help
> >get them back.
>
> Taking over a computer doesn't necessarily require it to be rebooted.

True.  I take over mac computers all the time when I have the 
need to engage in nefarious misdeeds.  I specifically target 
macs because there is a security hole that has existed for two 
decades, thru every new revision of OS, and it has never been 
fixed.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#88242

Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
> 
> I take over mac computers all the time when I have the 
> need to engage in nefarious misdeeds.  

Sure you do.

> I specifically target 
> macs because there is a security hole that has existed for two 
> decades, thru every new revision of OS, and it has never been 
> fixed.

Which security hole is that?

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#88276

On 30 Jan 2016, Nomen Nescio wrote
(in article<d81e1aa7ee747ff31f0775dacd34685f@dizum.com>):

> I specifically target
> macs because there is a security hole that has existed for two
> decades, thru every new revision of OS, and it has never been
> fixed.

Interesting. ‘Two decades’ would mean that the alleged security hole has 
been in place since System 7.something, as OS 8 was not available until 1997, 
or less than 20 years ago. That’s one heck of a bug. It first lived on Moto 
680x0 CPUs, then on PowerPCs, then on Intel. it survived at least three major 
network stacks. That’s pretty good, right there. Better yet, Apple changed 
the underpinnings of the OS multiple times in that timespan, not least when 
they went to OS X and dumped the previous schema. And the fact that there 
have been a lot of changes in OS X over the years means that a lot of things 
which worked with early versions simply no longer work. With the demise of 
Open Transport, for example, a significant number of older network apps died, 
but you’re saying that this security problem still works... and that for 
some reason no-one but you has used it, or if they have, that no-one has 
noticed anyone using it. Unless, of course, you can give examples which can 
be checked of someone using this alleged security hole. Three from the last 
20 years would do fine. And by ‘checked’ I mean that I want examples that 
_I_ can check. What _is_ this security hole, anyway?

And, oh, one more thing: does ‘every new version of the OS’ include A/UX?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#88283

On 2016-01-31, Wolffan <AKWolffan@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 30 Jan 2016, Nomen Nescio wrote
> (in article<d81e1aa7ee747ff31f0775dacd34685f@dizum.com>):
>
>> I specifically target macs because there is a security hole that has
>> existed for two decades, thru every new revision of OS, and it has
>> never been fixed.
>
> Interesting. ‘Two decades’ would mean that the alleged security hole has 
> been in place since System 7.something, as OS 8 was not available until 1997, 
> or less than 20 years ago. That’s one heck of a bug. It first lived on Moto 
> 680x0 CPUs, then on PowerPCs, then on Intel. it survived at least three major 
> network stacks. That’s pretty good, right there. Better yet, Apple changed 
> the underpinnings of the OS multiple times in that timespan, not least when 
> they went to OS X and dumped the previous schema. And the fact that there 
> have been a lot of changes in OS X over the years means that a lot of things 
> which worked with early versions simply no longer work. With the demise of 
> Open Transport, for example, a significant number of older network apps died, 
> but you’re saying that this security problem still works... and that for 
> some reason no-one but you has used it, or if they have, that no-one has 
> noticed anyone using it. Unless, of course, you can give examples which can 
> be checked of someone using this alleged security hole. Three from the last 
> 20 years would do fine. And by ‘checked’ I mean that I want examples that 
> _I_ can check. What _is_ this security hole, anyway?
>
> And, oh, one more thing: does ‘every new version of the OS’ include A/UX?

He's clearly a full of shit know-nothing. You'll get no further details,
because none exist. Those of us who actually know something about
security know he's lying through his teeth.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#88293

On 30 Jan 2016, Jolly Roger wrote
(in article <dh5hmgFo3lcU4@mid.individual.net>):

> On 2016-01-31, Wolffan<AKWolffan@gmail.com>wrote:
> > On 30 Jan 2016, Nomen Nescio wrote
> > (in article<d81e1aa7ee747ff31f0775dacd34685f@dizum.com>):
> > 
> > > I specifically target macs because there is a security hole that has
> > > existed for two decades, thru every new revision of OS, and it has
> > > never been fixed.
> > 
> > Interesting. ‘Two decades’ would mean that the alleged security hole 
has
> > been in place since System 7.something, as OS 8 was not available until
> > 1997,
> > or less than 20 years ago. That’s one heck of a bug. It first lived on
> > Moto
> > 680x0 CPUs, then on PowerPCs, then on Intel. it survived at least three
> > major
> > network stacks. That’s pretty good, right there. Better yet, Apple 
changed
> > the underpinnings of the OS multiple times in that timespan, not least when
> > they went to OS X and dumped the previous schema. And the fact that there
> > have been a lot of changes in OS X over the years means that a lot of 
things
> > which worked with early versions simply no longer work. With the demise of
> > Open Transport, for example, a significant number of older network apps
> > died,
> > but you’re saying that this security problem still works... and that for
> > some reason no-one but you has used it, or if they have, that no-one has
> > noticed anyone using it. Unless, of course, you can give examples which can
> > be checked of someone using this alleged security hole. Three from the last
> > 20 years would do fine. And by ‘checked’ I mean that I want examples
> > that
> > _I_ can check. What _is_ this security hole, anyway?
> > 
> > And, oh, one more thing: does ‘every new version of the OS’ include
> > A/UX?
> 
> He's clearly a full of shit know-nothing.

that was clear.
> You'll get no further details,
> because none exist.

Didn’t think I would. I expect him to either not reply at all or to go into 
Dodgeball Mode. Either way would be revealing, though Dodgeball Mode would be 
more entertaining.
> Those of us who actually know something about
> security know he's lying through his teeth.

All true. However, the sheer scale of his shameless mendacity is 
breathtaking.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#88373

In article <dh5hmgFo3lcU4@mid.individual.net>
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> On 2016-01-31, Wolffan <AKWolffan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 30 Jan 2016, Nomen Nescio wrote
> > (in article<d81e1aa7ee747ff31f0775dacd34685f@dizum.com>):
> >
> >> I specifically target macs because there is a security hole that has
> >> existed for two decades, thru every new revision of OS, and it has
> >> never been fixed.
> >
> > Interesting. ‘Two decades’ would mean that the alleged security hole has
> > been in place since System 7.something, as OS 8 was not available until 1997,
> > or less than 20 years ago. That’s one heck of a bug. It first lived on Moto
> > 680x0 CPUs, then on PowerPCs, then on Intel. it survived at least three major
> > network stacks. That’s pretty good, right there. Better yet, Apple changed
> > the underpinnings of the OS multiple times in that timespan, not least when
> > they went to OS X and dumped the previous schema. And the fact that there
> > have been a lot of changes in OS X over the years means that a lot of things
> > which worked with early versions simply no longer work. With the demise of
> > Open Transport, for example, a significant number of older network apps died,
> > but you’re saying that this security problem still works... and that for
> > some reason no-one but you has used it, or if they have, that no-one has
> > noticed anyone using it. Unless, of course, you can give examples which can
> > be checked of someone using this alleged security hole. Three from the last
> > 20 years would do fine. And by ‘checked’ I mean that I want examples that
> > _I_ can check. What _is_ this security hole, anyway?
> >
> > And, oh, one more thing: does ‘every new version of the OS’ include A/UX?
>
> He's clearly a full of shit know-nothing. You'll get no further details,
> because none exist. Those of us who actually know something about
> security know he's lying through his teeth.

Lol. Security lame coming from a mac user.  That's too fucking 
funny.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#88381

On 31 Jan 2016, Anonymous wrote
(in article<12535d779fd5629591df146c0fdf894c@hoi-polloi.org>):

> In article<dh5hmgFo3lcU4@mid.individual.net>
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On 2016-01-31, Wolffan <AKWolffan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 30 Jan 2016, Nomen Nescio wrote
> > > (in article<d81e1aa7ee747ff31f0775dacd34685f@dizum.com>):
> > > 
> > > > I specifically target macs because there is a security hole that has
> > > > existed for two decades, thru every new revision of OS, and it has
> > > > never been fixed.
> > > 
> > > Interesting. ‘Two decades’ would mean that the alleged security hole
> > > has
> > > been in place since System 7.something, as OS 8 was not available until
> > > 1997,
> > > or less than 20 years ago. That’s one heck of a bug. It first lived on
> > > Moto
> > > 680x0 CPUs, then on PowerPCs, then on Intel. it survived at least three
> > > major
> > > network stacks. That’s pretty good, right there. Better yet, Apple
> > > changed
> > > the underpinnings of the OS multiple times in that timespan, not least 
when
> > > they went to OS X and dumped the previous schema. And the fact that there
> > > have been a lot of changes in OS X over the years means that a lot of
> > > things
> > > which worked with early versions simply no longer work. With the demise 
of
> > > Open Transport, for example, a significant number of older network apps
> > > died,
> > > but you’re saying that this security problem still works... and that 
for
> > > some reason no-one but you has used it, or if they have, that no-one has
> > > noticed anyone using it. Unless, of course, you can give examples which 
can
> > > be checked of someone using this alleged security hole. Three from the 
last
> > > 20 years would do fine. And by ‘checked’ I mean that I want examples
> > > that
> > > _I_ can check. What _is_ this security hole, anyway?
> > > 
> > > And, oh, one more thing: does ‘every new version of the OS’ include
> > > A/UX?
> > 
> > He's clearly a full of shit know-nothing. You'll get no further details,
> > because none exist. Those of us who actually know something about
> > security know he's lying through his teeth.
> 
> Lol. Security lame coming from a mac user. That's too fucking
> funny.

so what is this 20-year-old security hole?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#88426

Wolffan <AKWolffan@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 31 Jan 2016, Anonymous wrote
> (in article<12535d779fd5629591df146c0fdf894c@hoi-polloi.org>):
> 
>> In article<dh5hmgFo3lcU4@mid.individual.net>
>> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> He's clearly a full of shit know-nothing. You'll get no further details,
>>> because none exist. Those of us who actually know something about
>>> security know he's lying through his teeth.
>> 
>> Lol. Security lame coming from a mac user. That's too fucking
>> funny.
> 
> so what is this 20-year-old security hole?

*crickets chirping*

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#88884

In article
<0001HW.1C5F111601D3DF987000005B13CF@news.eternal-september.org>,
Wolffan <AKWolffan@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> so what is this 20-year-old security hole?

It's the user ... but it's okay, it's his birthday next week and he'll
be turning 9..., err, "21".  ;-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#88503

In article <12535d779fd5629591df146c0fdf894c@hoi-polloi.org>
Anonymous <anonymous@hoi-polloi.org> wrote:
>
> Lol. Security lame coming from a mac user.  That's too fucking
> funny.

Apple users have to be protected from themselves, hence the 
platforms absence of value to enterprise computing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#88507

On 2/1/16 4:44 PM, Fritz Wuehler wrote:
> In article <12535d779fd5629591df146c0fdf894c@hoi-polloi.org>
> Anonymous <anonymous@hoi-polloi.org> wrote:
>>
>> Lol. Security lame coming from a mac user.  That's too fucking
>> funny.
>
> Apple users have to be protected from themselves, hence the
> platforms absence of value to enterprise computing.
>
LOL

Tell it to IBM who is rolling them out by the thousands internally.

:-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#88508

In article <n8p0dj$bv5$2@news.datemas.de>, Alan Baker
<alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:

> >> Lol. Security lame coming from a mac user.  That's too fucking
> >> funny.
> >
> > Apple users have to be protected from themselves, hence the
> > platforms absence of value to enterprise computing.
> >
> LOL
> 
> Tell it to IBM who is rolling them out by the thousands internally.

and finding macs to be much cheaper to deploy and maintain.

and there's also a shitload of money in the consumer space, where
microsoft is very weak.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web