Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.os.linux > #56901 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "anonymous" <anonymous@rip.ax.lt> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2019-06-16 07:53 -0500 |
| Last post | 2019-06-25 15:11 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 244 — 42 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.os.linux
Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "anonymous" <anonymous@rip.ax.lt> - 2019-06-16 07:53 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Anonymous" <nobody@mixmin.net> - 2019-06-16 07:56 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Fenris <fenris@invalid.invalid> - 2019-06-16 15:53 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-06-16 15:35 +0100
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2019-06-16 15:30 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-06-16 16:53 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "School of Agriculture" <ag@hick.edu> - 2019-06-17 14:35 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-06-17 20:42 +0100
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-06-17 17:31 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2019-06-17 20:30 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-19 10:12 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2019-06-17 20:30 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Anonymous" <nobody@mixmin.net> - 2019-06-18 07:04 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Fenris <fenris@invalid.invalid> - 2019-06-18 14:18 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-06-18 14:17 +0100
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-06-18 08:52 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-06-20 05:57 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-06-20 07:05 -0500
Using 'sed' to delete a line from a file (Was: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2019-06-20 12:32 +0000
Re: Using 'sed' to delete a line from a file (Was: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug) Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-20 12:17 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Anonymous" <anon@anon.com> - 2019-06-20 08:31 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Anonymous" <anon@anon.com> - 2019-06-20 08:33 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Anonymous" <anon@anon.com> - 2019-06-20 08:42 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Sir Gaygory's Owner's Owner 🐶笛 <root@127.0.0.1> - 2019-06-16 11:57 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "J.O. Aho" <user@example.net> - 2019-06-16 21:28 +0200
How come we're not talking about (Was: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2019-06-16 20:12 +0000
Re: How come we're not talking about (Was: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug) "J.O. Aho" <user@example.net> - 2019-06-17 06:52 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Sir Gaygory's Owner's Owner 🐶笛 <root@127.0.0.1> - 2019-06-21 13:24 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-16 11:12 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2019-06-16 13:26 -0700
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-06-16 13:34 -0700
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-19 10:20 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Georges <georges@prout.com> - 2019-06-19 10:55 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-19 12:37 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Georges <georges@prout.com> - 2019-06-19 13:13 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-20 14:31 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug ruben safir <ruben@mrbrklyn.com> - 2019-07-20 19:43 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-19 09:36 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-20 14:36 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug ruben safir <ruben@mrbrklyn.com> - 2019-07-20 19:37 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2019-06-19 21:32 +0300
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Georges <georges@prout.com> - 2019-06-19 20:47 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-19 21:01 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-06-19 20:23 +0100
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-19 22:53 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-06-19 23:09 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Georges <georges@prout.com> - 2019-06-20 05:21 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-06-20 04:16 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Georges <georges@prout.com> - 2019-06-20 06:21 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-20 14:38 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-06-20 13:30 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-20 19:21 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-06-20 18:39 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-20 22:52 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-06-20 23:48 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-21 13:01 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-06-21 12:30 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-21 14:51 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-06-21 13:43 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-23 12:56 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-06-21 08:55 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-21 19:01 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "F. Russell" <frussell@random.info> - 2019-06-21 13:33 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-06-21 13:39 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-06-21 10:14 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-21 19:09 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2019-06-21 13:39 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-21 19:07 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "F. Russell" <frussell@random.info> - 2019-06-21 17:19 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-21 19:57 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> - 2019-06-21 23:14 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Lucifer <LuciferMorningstar@bigpond.com> - 2019-06-23 19:00 +1000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2019-06-22 00:17 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2019-06-22 02:08 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-23 12:59 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2019-06-21 11:18 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-21 19:10 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-06-21 19:57 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-21 23:09 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-06-21 08:17 +0100
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-21 13:03 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-06-19 19:51 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-19 22:45 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug ruben safir <ruben@mrbrklyn.com> - 2019-07-20 19:46 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-19 21:00 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-06-19 20:20 +0100
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-20 14:43 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-06-19 16:44 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-19 22:57 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> - 2019-06-19 16:17 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-06-19 17:43 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-20 00:58 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-06-19 17:40 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Georges <georges@prout.com> - 2019-06-19 23:53 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug ruben safir <ruben@mrbrklyn.com> - 2019-07-20 19:31 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Freenet" <pieer@free.fr> - 2019-06-16 20:44 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-06-17 12:41 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-06-17 17:30 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-18 11:29 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-06-18 16:15 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-06-18 20:28 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-06-18 17:27 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-06-19 00:04 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-06-18 22:36 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-19 10:06 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-06-19 16:15 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-20 14:51 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be> - 2019-06-20 15:13 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-20 19:14 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-20 12:21 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2019-06-21 00:56 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-06-20 16:07 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-20 14:24 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-06-20 16:51 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-20 23:02 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-20 15:14 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-21 13:41 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2019-06-21 09:30 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-21 19:14 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-21 12:34 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-21 23:53 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-20 22:55 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-20 15:17 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-21 14:03 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-21 22:59 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-06-22 07:51 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-22 16:53 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-06-22 18:56 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-22 20:09 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-06-22 22:48 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-22 22:51 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-23 13:19 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-06-23 07:33 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-06-23 15:07 +0100
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-24 02:09 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-06-23 22:22 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-24 11:41 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-06-24 07:24 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-23 13:14 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-23 11:50 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-24 02:41 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-30 15:08 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-06-30 21:14 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-30 15:22 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-06-30 21:47 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-07-01 08:10 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-07-01 10:05 +0100
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-07-01 12:54 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-07-01 12:08 +0100
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-07-01 11:54 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2019-07-01 12:30 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-07-01 17:11 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-07-01 17:06 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-07-02 09:35 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-07-02 09:20 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-07-02 14:28 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-07-01 07:51 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-07-01 12:46 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-07-01 09:50 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-07-01 17:31 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-07-01 12:10 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-07-02 14:17 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-07-02 10:22 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-07-02 19:10 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-07-02 19:16 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-07-02 12:27 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-07-02 14:33 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-07-03 13:34 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-07-03 09:06 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-07-04 03:14 +0100
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug - spam on mail "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-07-04 15:26 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-07-01 17:16 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-07-02 14:20 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-06-23 16:36 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-24 03:37 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-06-24 13:50 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-24 23:14 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-06-21 16:01 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-21 23:57 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-06-21 17:35 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2019-06-21 22:04 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-06-22 12:57 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2019-06-21 21:58 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-06-22 07:32 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-21 23:10 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-06-22 08:21 +0100
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-06-22 13:01 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-22 16:55 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-06-22 18:47 -0500
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-22 20:15 -0600
Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-23 13:52 +0200
Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-06-23 10:02 -0500
Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-24 02:17 +0200
Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-06-23 22:30 -0500
Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-23 11:56 -0600
Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] Sidney_Kotic <kant@have.it> - 2019-06-23 10:11 -0800
Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-24 03:23 +0200
Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-06-24 09:07 +0000
Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-24 11:52 +0200
Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-06-24 14:14 -0400
Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-24 23:21 +0200
Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-30 15:38 -0600
Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-30 15:31 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2019-06-30 09:17 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-30 15:41 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-21 23:02 -0600
Fidonet [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-23 14:02 +0200
Re: Fidonet [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-06-24 09:11 +0000
Re: Fidonet [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-24 11:53 +0200
Re: Fidonet [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2019-06-25 07:37 +0200
Re: Fidonet [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-25 16:49 +0200
Re: Fidonet [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-06-25 19:34 +0100
Re: Fidonet [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2019-06-30 09:36 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2019-06-30 08:52 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2019-06-30 08:25 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-30 20:01 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-06-30 20:57 +0100
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-30 15:47 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8@verizon.net> - 2019-06-30 16:13 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-19 00:43 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-19 10:28 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2019-06-19 10:30 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-19 12:51 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2019-06-19 11:30 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-19 21:03 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-06-19 12:30 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-19 21:11 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-06-19 20:10 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Georges <georges@prout.com> - 2019-06-19 22:18 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-06-19 20:33 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-19 23:05 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-06-19 23:30 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-19 21:43 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Georges <georges@prout.com> - 2019-06-20 05:50 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-20 23:20 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2019-06-19 21:45 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-06-20 03:23 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2019-06-19 21:45 -0600
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-20 23:15 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2019-06-30 09:54 -0400
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-06-30 20:06 +0200
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2019-06-19 11:55 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2019-06-22 13:20 +0000
Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2019-06-25 15:11 +0200
Page 10 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 Next page →
| From | "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-06-21 22:04 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <20190621220412.21eb0fda@WizardsTower> |
| In reply to | #57096 |
On Fri, 21 Jun 2019 17:35:33 -0500 John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> wrote: > Carlos writes: > > Certainly. It was possible to not use it, but quite more > > complicated. It arrived at the scene just as I was studying how to > > connect my Linux machine to Internet, just in time. > > Debian had Pppconfig before Wvdial arrived. Pppconfig was better (I'm > biased). THAT'S the package that used the pon/poff commands. Memory begins to fail... Thanks for reviving it for the moment. -- Cybe R. Wizard “It’s a lack of clarity that creates chaos and frustration. Those emotions are poison to any living goal.” Steve Maraboli
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-06-22 12:57 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <87h88h1rt1.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> |
| In reply to | #57101 |
On Fri, 21 Jun 2019 22:04:12 -0500, Cybe R. Wizard wrote: > > On Fri, 21 Jun 2019 17:35:33 -0500 > John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> wrote: > >> Debian had Pppconfig before Wvdial arrived. Pppconfig was better (I'm >> biased). > > THAT'S the package that used the pon/poff commands. Memory begins to > fail... That's how I go online with DSL since more than 14 years. -- Andreas My random thoughts and comments https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-06-21 21:58 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <20190621215818.08ad828b@WizardsTower> |
| In reply to | #57092 |
On Fri, 21 Jun 2019 23:57:57 +0200 "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: [wvdial] > > Certainly. It was possible to not use it, but quite more complicated. > It arrived at the scene just as I was studying how to connect my Linux > machine to Internet, just in time. I'm no big Linux expert man, but didn't pon/poff suffice? I seem to remember setting that up once in about 5 minutes and using it until modems went by the wayside. Wvdial? Confuse me more. ;-] ...but them I still prefer a WM to a DE even if I'm not a command line cowboy. That said, in the modern world wicd rocks. -- Cybe R. Wizard You can't stop the signal... Everything goes somewhere, and I go everywhere. Mr. Universe Serenity
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-06-22 07:32 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <87pnn5rebh.fsf@dhh.gt.org> |
| In reply to | #57100 |
Cybe R. Wizard writes: > I'm no big Linux expert man, but didn't pon/poff suffice? You have to edit the pppd configuration files. Pppconfig and Wvdial do that for you. -- John Hasler jhasler@newsguy.com Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-06-21 23:10 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <qekd9q$ma$1@tncsrv09.home.tnetconsulting.net> |
| In reply to | #57092 |
On 6/21/19 3:57 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote: > Certainly. It was possible to not use it, but quite more > complicated. What would be used as an alternative to wvdial? I remember Roaring Penguin had a PPPoE implementation. By the time I needed PPPoE, the Linux kernel had support for it. I think it creates a pseudo network interface and serial interface, linking the two. The traditional PPP daemon would interface with the serial, while the TCP/IP stack would work with the pseudo interface. Something like that. It's been a while. > It arrived at the scene just as I was studying how to connect my > Linux machine to Internet, just in time. I remember using SLIP in the mid-to-late '90s to connect to what started as a BBS like creation on a Sun system. You could start SLIP after connecting, and navigating a few menus. In hindsight it was exiting the BBS interface and execing (?) the user space slip program. After that, everything I did was PPP (over serial or Ethernet) or stock TCP/IP over Ethernet. Admittedly it might have been Ethernet encapsulated as ATM (RFC 1483), Frame Relay (???), or Cable Modem. But that was still bog standard Ethernet to the Linux machine. > Of course, me too. FIDO was for "netmail" and their own groups. I don't > recall the name now. Isolated from nntp, different system. Although I > believe some sysops had a gateway to connect to some nntp news groups. "netmail", was that the email in FidoNet? I seem to recall "echos" being the term for newsgroups. I can think of a couple of people that still run BBSs, at least one of which still has a modem & phone line. One of them also has a Usenet feed into the system. I don't know if he's gatewaying into FidoNet or just having echos and Usenet available on his board. -- Grant. . . . unix || die
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-06-22 08:21 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qekkuo$pnc$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #57104 |
On 22/06/2019 06:10, Grant Taylor wrote: > On 6/21/19 3:57 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> Certainly. It was possible to not use it, but quite more complicated. > > What would be used as an alternative to wvdial? > > I remember Roaring Penguin had a PPPoE implementation. By the time I > needed PPPoE, the Linux kernel had support for it. I think it creates a > pseudo network interface and serial interface, linking the two. The > traditional PPP daemon would interface with the serial, while the TCP/IP > stack would work with the pseudo interface. Something like that. It's > been a while. > >> It arrived at the scene just as I was studying how to connect my Linux >> machine to Internet, just in time. > > I remember using SLIP in the mid-to-late '90s to connect to what started > as a BBS like creation on a Sun system. You could start SLIP after > connecting, and navigating a few menus. In hindsight it was exiting the > BBS interface and execing (?) the user space slip program. > > After that, everything I did was PPP (over serial or Ethernet) or stock > TCP/IP over Ethernet. Admittedly it might have been Ethernet > encapsulated as ATM (RFC 1483), Frame Relay (???), or Cable Modem. But > that was still bog standard Ethernet to the Linux machine. > >> Of course, me too. FIDO was for "netmail" and their own groups. I >> don't recall the name now. Isolated from nntp, different system. >> Although I believe some sysops had a gateway to connect to some nntp >> news groups. > > "netmail", was that the email in FidoNet? I seem to recall "echos" > being the term for newsgroups. > > I can think of a couple of people that still run BBSs, at least one of > which still has a modem & phone line. One of them also has a Usenet > feed into the system. I don't know if he's gatewaying into FidoNet or > just having echos and Usenet available on his board. > > > Oddly I dont think I ever ran IP over a modem. I went from UUCP mail and usenet at work to BBS gateways over a modem at home, until at some point I got ISDN for IP which got replaced by ADSL when that became available. -- Renewable energy: Expensive solutions that don't work to a problem that doesn't exist instituted by self legalising protection rackets that don't protect, masquerading as public servants who don't serve the public.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-06-22 13:01 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <87ef3l1rmz.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> |
| In reply to | #57104 |
On Fri, 21 Jun 2019 23:10:40 -0600, Grant Taylor wrote: > > On 6/21/19 3:57 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> Certainly. It was possible to not use it, but quite more >> complicated. > > What would be used as an alternative to wvdial? > > I remember Roaring Penguin had a PPPoE implementation. By the time I > needed PPPoE, the Linux kernel had support for it. I think it creates > a pseudo network interface and serial interface, linking the two. The > traditional PPP daemon would interface with the serial, while the > TCP/IP stack would work with the pseudo interface. Something like > that. It's been a while. Here a pseudo device ppp0 is created with my public IP address on it. -- Andreas
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-06-22 16:55 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <qembmi$16g$2@tncsrv09.home.tnetconsulting.net> |
| In reply to | #57139 |
On 6/22/19 11:01 AM, Andreas Kohlbach wrote: > Here a pseudo device ppp0 is created with my public IP address on it. That's what I saw the last time I supported PPPoE. It's a PPP connection, thus pseudo network device, that just happens to transmit over Ethernet instead of a serial modem. -- Grant. . . . unix || die
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-06-22 18:47 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <87zhm9p4h4.fsf@dhh.gt.org> |
| In reply to | #57151 |
Grant writes: > It's a PPP connection, thus pseudo network device, that just happens > to transmit over Ethernet instead of a serial modem. It's a tunnel. You have the overhead of PPP packets layered over by the overhead of Ethernet packets (and often an ATM layer in the DSL modem). Inefficient, but it allowed ISPs to switch from dialup to DSL with zero changes to their RADIUS servers. -- John Hasler jhasler@newsguy.com Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-06-22 20:15 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <qemne9$q5f$1@tncsrv09.home.tnetconsulting.net> |
| In reply to | #57152 |
On 6/22/19 5:47 PM, John Hasler wrote: > It's a tunnel. Yes, PPP is a tunnel. But that doesn't change the fact that you have a pseudo (tunnel) interface to use. ;-) > You have the overhead of PPP packets layered over by the overhead > of Ethernet packets (and often an ATM layer in the DSL modem). PPPoE via ATM PVC: IP inside of PPP inside of Ethernet inside of ATM PPPoA via ATM PVC: IP inside of PPP inside of ATM PPPoE via Frame Relay: IP inside of PPP inside of Frame Relay PPP<anything> is going to have the PPP overhead, and complications, e.g. MTU issues. > Inefficient, but it allowed ISPs to switch from dialup to DSL with > zero changes to their RADIUS servers. PPPoE also allows ISPs to authenticate clients. Native IP over RFC 1483 bridging doesn't support authentication. This is especially germane if something strips the RFC 1483 bridging before traffic gets to the ISP's router, thus stripping any ATM PVC / Frame Relay DLCI identifiers. -- Grant. . . . unix || die
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-06-23 13:52 +0200 |
| Subject | Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] |
| Message-ID | <gn97g7F97qkU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #57104 |
On 22/06/2019 07.10, Grant Taylor wrote:
> On 6/21/19 3:57 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> Certainly. It was possible to not use it, but quite more complicated.
>
> What would be used as an alternative to wvdial?
Directly editing some files. I seem to recall something called chat that
would listen to the modem responses, send login/pass to the service...
names like "chap" or perhaps "pap". After login the ppp service was
started. I knew about it but didn't have to do it, wvdial arrived just
in time. It calls all the necessary pieces.
> I remember Roaring Penguin had a PPPoE implementation. By the time I
> needed PPPoE, the Linux kernel had support for it. I think it creates a
> pseudo network interface and serial interface, linking the two. The
> traditional PPP daemon would interface with the serial, while the TCP/IP
> stack would work with the pseudo interface. Something like that. It's
> been a while.
>
>> It arrived at the scene just as I was studying how to connect my Linux
>> machine to Internet, just in time.
>
> I remember using SLIP in the mid-to-late '90s to connect to what started
> as a BBS like creation on a Sun system. You could start SLIP after
> connecting, and navigating a few menus. In hindsight it was exiting the
> BBS interface and execing (?) the user space slip program.
>
> After that, everything I did was PPP (over serial or Ethernet) or stock
> TCP/IP over Ethernet. Admittedly it might have been Ethernet
> encapsulated as ATM (RFC 1483), Frame Relay (???), or Cable Modem. But
> that was still bog standard Ethernet to the Linux machine.
>
>> Of course, me too. FIDO was for "netmail" and their own groups. I
>> don't recall the name now. Isolated from nntp, different system.
>> Although I believe some sysops had a gateway to connect to some nntp
>> news groups.
>
> "netmail", was that the email in FidoNet? I seem to recall "echos"
> being the term for newsgroups.
Yes, that is. But not usenet newsgroups, not directly. Just Fidonet
groups, that were called echos or perhaps echoareas. And we were given
addresses called "points".
I remember my sysop had a system where I could request the list of files
he hosted by sending perhaps a special "netmail". Then I could request
download of the files I wanted, to be downloaded on the next connection.
Maybe it was a standard, because I downloaded files from other nodes
directly. I think it was the Ralph Brown Interrupt List that I
downloaded from a node on the canary Islands - an expensive phone call
for me, but I needed that file.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralf_Brown%27s_Interrupt_List>
> I can think of a couple of people that still run BBSs, at least one of
> which still has a modem & phone line. One of them also has a Usenet
> feed into the system. I don't know if he's gatewaying into FidoNet or
> just having echos and Usenet available on his board.
I knew one that had the BBS on telnet.
Yes, gateways to usenet were common at the end, but usually we had to
pay the sysop a small quantity to help with the costs. Fidonet was
basically free, but nodes incurred in costs (phone calls and possibly a
data connection) and often requested help with them. I don't recall the
payment method... not credit card, certainly. Not here. Postal order,
probably.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-06-23 10:02 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] |
| Message-ID | <87blyopco9.fsf@dhh.gt.org> |
| In reply to | #57169 |
Carlos writes: > Directly editing some files. I seem to recall something called chat > that would listen to the modem responses, send login/pass to the > service... names like "chap" or perhaps "pap". After login the ppp > service was started. I knew about it but didn't have to do it, wvdial > arrived just in time. It calls all the necessary pieces. CHAP and PAP are authentication protocols often used by ISPs. Microsoft, of course, invented their own variant, MSCHAP. Chat is a sort of a special-purpose expect program for handling the modem dialogue. Doing it the hard way you had to edit the appropriate secrets file, a pppd options file for each ISP, and a chatscript for each ISP. Wvdial requires editing it's configuration file but it's fairly simple. It tries to automate as much as possible and usually succeeds. It has to be run every time you connect and is somewhat limited in its options. It has a companion modem discovery program. Pppconfig uses an interactive dialogue with the user to collect the information it needs to edit the above mentioned files, setting things up so that pon and poff work. It attempts to discover the modem. It tries to offer reasonable defaults where that makes sense. It's quite flexible: It handles just about anything you could achieve by manually editing the files. Dial-on-demand is an option. You can re-run it to make changes without having to re-enter everything (it will also respect manual changes). Pppconfig lacks an interactive testing mode. I believe Slackware once had a much simpler script called pppconfig. -- John Hasler jhasler@newsguy.com Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-06-24 02:17 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] |
| Message-ID | <8dh5ufxism.ln2@minas-tirith.valinor> |
| In reply to | #57177 |
On 23/06/2019 17.02, John Hasler wrote:
> Carlos writes:
>> Directly editing some files. I seem to recall something called chat
>> that would listen to the modem responses, send login/pass to the
>> service... names like "chap" or perhaps "pap". After login the ppp
>> service was started. I knew about it but didn't have to do it, wvdial
>> arrived just in time. It calls all the necessary pieces.
>
> CHAP and PAP are authentication protocols often used by ISPs.
> Microsoft, of course, invented their own variant, MSCHAP. Chat is a
> sort of a special-purpose expect program for handling the modem
> dialogue.
Yes, I remember them now.
> Doing it the hard way you had to edit the appropriate secrets file, a
> pppd options file for each ISP, and a chatscript for each ISP.
>
> Wvdial requires editing it's configuration file but it's fairly simple.
> It tries to automate as much as possible and usually succeeds. It has
> to be run every time you connect and is somewhat limited in its options.
> It has a companion modem discovery program.
Limited? I found it quite rich :-)
There was also an autoconfiguration program.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-06-23 22:30 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] |
| Message-ID | <87sgrzoe29.fsf@dhh.gt.org> |
| In reply to | #57200 |
Carlos
> There was also an autoconfiguration program [for Wvdial].
There is Wvdialconf. From the man page:
wvdialconf detects your modem, its maximum baud rate, and a good
initialization string and generates or updates the wvdial(1)
configuration file based on this information.
wvdialconf is completely non-interactive. You still need to edit
/etc/wvdial.conf to specify the phone number, login name, and
password of your internet account in order for wvdial(1) to
work.
--
John Hasler
jhasler@newsguy.com
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-06-23 11:56 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] |
| Message-ID | <qeoeh9$cv2$1@tncsrv09.home.tnetconsulting.net> |
| In reply to | #57169 |
On 6/23/19 5:52 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote: > Directly editing some files. I seem to recall something called > chat that would listen to the modem responses, send login/pass to > the service... names like "chap" or perhaps "pap". After login the > ppp service was started. I knew about it but didn't have to do it, > wvdial arrived just in time. It calls all the necessary pieces. ACK > Yes, that is. But not usenet newsgroups, not directly. Just Fidonet > groups, that were called echos or perhaps echoareas. And we were > given addresses called "points". *nod* email = netmail newsgroup = echo (areas) I remember points. My understanding is that they are a way to behave as a sub-node from an addressing perspective. You could have an address on a board and / or an address of a point behind the board. > I remember my sysop had a system where I could request the list of > files he hosted by sending perhaps a special "netmail". Then I could > request download of the files I wanted, to be downloaded on the next > connection. Maybe it was a standard, because I downloaded files from > other nodes directly. I think it was the Ralph Brown Interrupt List > that I downloaded from a node on the canary Islands - an expensive > phone call for me, but I needed that file. > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralf_Brown%27s_Interrupt_List> :-) > I knew one that had the BBS on telnet. > > Yes, gateways to usenet were common at the end, but usually we had > to pay the sysop a small quantity to help with the costs. Fidonet was > basically free, but nodes incurred in costs (phone calls and possibly > a data connection) and often requested help with them. I don't recall > the payment method... not credit card, certainly. Not here. Postal > order, probably. ACK The SysOps and users would get together frequently (monthly) where I'm from. I think it was common for people to take turns buying some SysOps pizza as a trade for them paying for services. My understanding is that people were largely happy with the arrangement. -- Grant. . . . unix || die
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sidney_Kotic <kant@have.it> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-06-23 10:11 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] |
| Message-ID | <qeofd9$2ff$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #57189 |
On 6/23/19 9:56 AM, Grant Taylor wrote: > The SysOps and users would get together frequently (monthly) where I'm from. I > think it was common for people to take turns buying some SysOps pizza as a trade > for them paying for services. Hrumpfff! Nobody ever bought me pizza. I started out as a point, then as a node, picked up the /0 at the end. We, 4 or 5 of us, met once a week for coffee. We solved all the worlds problems. Often someone would pickup the entire bill, sometime me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-06-24 03:23 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] |
| Message-ID | <m8l5ufxjno.ln2@minas-tirith.valinor> |
| In reply to | #57189 |
On 23/06/2019 19.56, Grant Taylor wrote:
> On 6/23/19 5:52 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> Directly editing some files. I seem to recall something called chat
>> that would listen to the modem responses, send login/pass to the
>> service... names like "chap" or perhaps "pap". After login the ppp
>> service was started. I knew about it but didn't have to do it, wvdial
>> arrived just in time. It calls all the necessary pieces.
>
> ACK
>
>> Yes, that is. But not usenet newsgroups, not directly. Just Fidonet
>> groups, that were called echos or perhaps echoareas. And we were given
>> addresses called "points".
>
> *nod*
>
> email = netmail
> newsgroup = echo (areas)
>
> I remember points. My understanding is that they are a way to behave as
> a sub-node from an addressing perspective. You could have an address on
> a board and / or an address of a point behind the board.
Well, we used the same software as nodes, with a configuration a bit
different. It would not listen for the modem, it could not receive
independently, only connect with the authorized node. Oh, a point can
connect directly with another node not is own to send netmail directed
to it or its points. I don't remember how authentication was done. IF it
was done.
>> I remember my sysop had a system where I could request the list of
>> files he hosted by sending perhaps a special "netmail". Then I could
>> request download of the files I wanted, to be downloaded on the next
>> connection. Maybe it was a standard, because I downloaded files from
>> other nodes directly. I think it was the Ralph Brown Interrupt List
>> that I downloaded from a node on the canary Islands - an expensive
>> phone call for me, but I needed that file.
>>
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralf_Brown%27s_Interrupt_List>
>
> :-)
>
>> I knew one that had the BBS on telnet.
>>
>> Yes, gateways to usenet were common at the end, but usually we had to
>> pay the sysop a small quantity to help with the costs. Fidonet was
>> basically free, but nodes incurred in costs (phone calls and possibly
>> a data connection) and often requested help with them. I don't recall
>> the payment method... not credit card, certainly. Not here. Postal
>> order, probably.
>
> ACK
>
> The SysOps and users would get together frequently (monthly) where I'm
> from. I think it was common for people to take turns buying some SysOps
> pizza as a trade for them paying for services. My understanding is that
> people were largely happy with the arrangement.
We were. We met I think twice, in my time there. Once for a lunch, and
another at a lunch plus an ultra-light flying club. But I was to afraid
to take a ride. A flight, I mean.
Our group said something about getting a lot of chicken on a Saturday.
Maybe they always went to a famous chicken restaurant :-)
Did we call that "meeting in vertical"? Or was that a saying of Radio
Amateurs?
WHAT?! :-O
My laptop has just made a weird ugly noise through the speakers. It has
scared me, it is 3 AM. No idea what it was... probably Firefox has one
page loaded that did that. Which one? It is busy, 30% CPU. Maybe a news
page. Closed. CPU now close to zero. Oh, Chrome was open on another tab,
at the Amazon prime site. Closed too.
Uff.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-06-24 09:07 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] |
| Message-ID | <qeq3sa$sai$2@gonzo.revmaps.no-ip.org> |
| In reply to | #57199 |
On 2019-06-24, Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: > On 23/06/2019 19.56, Grant Taylor wrote: >> On 6/23/19 5:52 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote: >>> Directly editing some files. I seem to recall something called chat >>> that would listen to the modem responses, send login/pass to the >>> service... names like "chap" or perhaps "pap". After login the ppp >>> service was started. I knew about it but didn't have to do it, wvdial >>> arrived just in time. It calls all the necessary pieces. >> >> ACK >> >>> Yes, that is. But not usenet newsgroups, not directly. Just Fidonet >>> groups, that were called echos or perhaps echoareas. And we were given >>> addresses called "points". >> >> *nod* >> >> email = netmail >> newsgroup = echo (areas) >> >> I remember points. My understanding is that they are a way to behave as >> a sub-node from an addressing perspective. You could have an address on >> a board and / or an address of a point behind the board. > > Well, we used the same software as nodes, with a configuration a bit > different. It would not listen for the modem, it could not receive > independently, only connect with the authorized node. Oh, a point can > connect directly with another node not is own to send netmail directed > to it or its points. I don't remember how authentication was done. IF it > was done. I think there was auth for receiving, I don't recall there being any for sending. The phone company had a deal for fixed-price international calls one weekend ($5 for 2 hours or someting like that - down from $5 for 3 minutes), so I called up a BBS on the other side of the world for a few hours to download stuff. >>> I remember my sysop had a system where I could request the list of >>> files he hosted by sending perhaps a special "netmail". Then I could >>> request download of the files I wanted, to be downloaded on the next >>> connection. Maybe it was a standard, because I downloaded files from >>> other nodes directly. I think it was the Ralph Brown Interrupt List >>> that I downloaded from a node on the canary Islands - an expensive >>> phone call for me, but I needed that file. >>> >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralf_Brown%27s_Interrupt_List> That should have been available closer to you, I fairly sure that one made the programming file bone and, so, got wide disrtibution. >> The SysOps and users would get together frequently (monthly) where I'm >> from. I think it was common for people to take turns buying some SysOps >> pizza as a trade for them paying for services. My understanding is that >> people were largely happy with the arrangement. > > We were. We met I think twice, in my time there. Once for a lunch, and > another at a lunch plus an ultra-light flying club. But I was to afraid > to take a ride. A flight, I mean. > > Our group said something about getting a lot of chicken on a Saturday. > Maybe they always went to a famous chicken restaurant :-) > > Did we call that "meeting in vertical"? Or was that a saying of Radio > Amateurs? I'm fairly sure IRL was the term back then, and still is. -- When I tried casting out nines I made a hash of it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-06-24 11:52 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] |
| Message-ID | <r3j6ufx6bv.ln2@minas-tirith.valinor> |
| In reply to | #57209 |
On 24/06/2019 11.07, Jasen Betts wrote:
> On 2019-06-24, Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 23/06/2019 19.56, Grant Taylor wrote:
>>> On 6/23/19 5:52 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>> Directly editing some files. I seem to recall something called chat
>>>> that would listen to the modem responses, send login/pass to the
>>>> service... names like "chap" or perhaps "pap". After login the ppp
>>>> service was started. I knew about it but didn't have to do it, wvdial
>>>> arrived just in time. It calls all the necessary pieces.
>>>
>>> ACK
>>>
>>>> Yes, that is. But not usenet newsgroups, not directly. Just Fidonet
>>>> groups, that were called echos or perhaps echoareas. And we were given
>>>> addresses called "points".
>>>
>>> *nod*
>>>
>>> email = netmail
>>> newsgroup = echo (areas)
>>>
>>> I remember points. My understanding is that they are a way to behave as
>>> a sub-node from an addressing perspective. You could have an address on
>>> a board and / or an address of a point behind the board.
>>
>> Well, we used the same software as nodes, with a configuration a bit
>> different. It would not listen for the modem, it could not receive
>> independently, only connect with the authorized node. Oh, a point can
>> connect directly with another node not is own to send netmail directed
>> to it or its points. I don't remember how authentication was done. IF it
>> was done.
>
> I think there was auth for receiving, I don't recall there being any
> for sending.
Yes, the point got a password to pick his mail from the node.
>
> The phone company had a deal for fixed-price international calls one
> weekend ($5 for 2 hours or someting like that - down from $5 for 3
> minutes), so I called up a BBS on the other side of the world for a
> few hours to download stuff.
How cute! I never heard of such a thing here.
>
>>>> I remember my sysop had a system where I could request the list of
>>>> files he hosted by sending perhaps a special "netmail". Then I could
>>>> request download of the files I wanted, to be downloaded on the next
>>>> connection. Maybe it was a standard, because I downloaded files from
>>>> other nodes directly. I think it was the Ralph Brown Interrupt List
>>>> that I downloaded from a node on the canary Islands - an expensive
>>>> phone call for me, but I needed that file.
>>>>
>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralf_Brown%27s_Interrupt_List>
>
> That should have been available closer to you, I fairly sure that one
> made the programming file bone and, so, got wide disrtibution.
I could not locate it. Surely I polled some nodes for the list of files.
I don't remember how I located the file far away. Wait... was there a
search command on a message? Perhaps send a formatted message to certain
area?
I believe that the file was available closer, the next time I retrieved it.
>>> The SysOps and users would get together frequently (monthly) where I'm
>>> from. I think it was common for people to take turns buying some SysOps
>>> pizza as a trade for them paying for services. My understanding is that
>>> people were largely happy with the arrangement.
>>
>> We were. We met I think twice, in my time there. Once for a lunch, and
>> another at a lunch plus an ultra-light flying club. But I was to afraid
>> to take a ride. A flight, I mean.
>>
>> Our group said something about getting a lot of chicken on a Saturday.
>> Maybe they always went to a famous chicken restaurant :-)
>>
>> Did we call that "meeting in vertical"? Or was that a saying of Radio
>> Amateurs?
>
> I'm fairly sure IRL was the term back then, and still is.
>
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-06-24 14:14 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Ancient networking [Was: Re: Linux Command-Line Editors Vulnerable to High-Severity Bug] |
| Message-ID | <875zouam13.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> |
| In reply to | #57214 |
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 11:52:26 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: > > On 24/06/2019 11.07, Jasen Betts wrote: >> >> The phone company had a deal for fixed-price international calls one >> weekend ($5 for 2 hours or someting like that - down from $5 for 3 >> minutes), so I called up a BBS on the other side of the world for a >> few hours to download stuff. > > How cute! I never heard of such a thing here. When the monopoly of the Deutsche Telekom fell 1998 many small so called "call-by-call" provider popped up. Some offering only fixed phone service, others that combined with mobile and other also (or only) offered internet dial-up service. Prices went up and down (mostly down) and every company tried ti get a big piece of the pie. By dialing a special "area code" you would then be billed by the company associated with that area code. I remember some new company obviously wanted to test their hardware and offered the first hundred or so caller 24 hours for free. I think I used wvdial at that and had it dial-in five seconds before 0:00. I succeeded and nobody could call me that day because my single line was busy. -- Andreas
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 10 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.os.linux
csiph-web