Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #74027 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Farley Flud <fflud@gnu.rocks> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-09-13 12:57 +0000 |
| Last post | 2025-09-14 13:18 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 216 — 32 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
What Thinks Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Farley Flud <fflud@gnu.rocks> - 2025-09-13 12:57 +0000
Re: What Thinks Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Farley Flud <fflud@gnu.rocks> - 2025-09-13 13:23 +0000
Re: What Thinks Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Jacek Marcin Jaworski <jaworski1978@adres.pl> - 2025-09-13 15:28 +0200
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-13 22:00 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2025-09-14 08:26 +1000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-13 23:04 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-14 09:01 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-14 21:17 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-15 02:13 +0200
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Tyrone <none@none.none> - 2025-09-15 00:50 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-15 12:38 +0200
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-15 09:52 +0200
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-15 08:19 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-15 10:49 +0200
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-15 09:03 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-15 12:04 +0200
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-15 22:29 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-16 08:23 +0200
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-16 08:53 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-16 12:54 +0200
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-16 20:07 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-16 21:42 +0200
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-16 22:12 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-17 06:52 +0200
E-mail server-side attachment deduplication (was: Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner?) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-17 12:02 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-17 06:52 +0200
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-15 12:44 +0200
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-15 22:35 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-16 02:09 +0200
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-16 01:12 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? 🇵🇱Jacek Marcin Jaworski🇵🇱 <jaworski1978@adres.pl> - 2025-09-16 05:47 +0200
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-16 05:48 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-16 12:57 +0200
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-17 05:56 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-17 11:15 +0200
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-17 09:31 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-15 10:01 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-15 12:06 +0200
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-15 13:13 +0200
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-11-11 23:38 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-12 02:59 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-12 03:23 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-14 14:18 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-14 19:43 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-14 22:20 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-11-12 05:11 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-11-12 06:29 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-12 06:46 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-11-12 14:14 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-11-13 02:06 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-11-13 02:14 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-13 11:01 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-11-13 13:39 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-14 14:20 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-11-15 20:50 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-15 22:08 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-11-16 05:40 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-16 11:05 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-17 01:33 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-11-20 22:23 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-11-20 14:59 -0800
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-20 23:54 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-11-21 00:44 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-11-21 14:33 -0800
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-22 00:16 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-22 00:20 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-22 03:20 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2025-11-22 14:17 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-22 14:39 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-22 20:08 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? tom nossen <news@nossen.org> - 2025-11-26 22:07 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-26 21:50 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? tom nossen <news@nossen.org> - 2025-11-27 12:18 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-27 21:26 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-22 18:56 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-11-24 09:06 -0800
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-11-24 12:10 -0500
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-11-24 09:29 -0800
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-24 23:15 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-11-24 15:35 -0800
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-25 00:21 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-11-23 03:19 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-23 05:20 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-11-24 09:26 -0800
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-11-24 18:27 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-24 23:23 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-12-02 20:13 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-12-03 08:39 -0800
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-12-03 19:42 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-12-03 22:03 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-12-03 22:36 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-12-04 03:05 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-12-04 14:24 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-04 14:35 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-12-04 08:21 -0800
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-04 18:05 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-12-04 10:09 -0800
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-04 19:09 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-12-04 11:11 -0800
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-04 19:55 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-12-19 01:22 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-12-18 20:45 -0500
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-19 10:54 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-12-19 09:11 -0500
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-19 15:02 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-12-19 10:38 -0500
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-12-19 11:03 -0500
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-19 18:14 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-12-19 08:09 -0800
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-12-19 21:56 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-12-20 05:56 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-20 10:52 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-12-20 15:03 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-20 14:50 +0000
Ozempic (and Mounjaro, Zepbound, etc) Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2025-12-20 15:04 +0000
Re: Ozempic (and Mounjaro, Zepbound, etc) chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-12-20 17:21 -0600
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-12-20 20:45 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Sump <sumpusent@outlook.com> - 2025-12-20 22:02 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-21 01:56 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Sump <sumpusent@outlook.com> - 2025-12-21 02:10 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-21 02:13 +0000
Re: Big Pharma (was Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner?) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-12-21 02:09 +0000
Re: Big Pharma (was Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner?) Sump <sumpusent@outlook.com> - 2025-12-21 02:38 +0000
Re: Big Pharma (was Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-12-21 05:00 +0000
Re: Big Pharma (was Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-21 10:57 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-12-21 04:47 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-12-21 04:43 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-12-20 15:01 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-20 14:47 +0000
Re: Marxist Healthcare( was Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner?) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-12-21 02:11 +0000
Re: Marxist Healthcare( was Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-12-21 04:34 +0000
Re: Marxist Healthcare( was Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner?) Bob Tennent <rdtennent@tennent.ca> - 2025-12-22 02:17 +0000
Re: Marxist Healthcare( was Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner?) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-12-22 04:43 +0000
Re: Marxist Healthcare( was Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner?) Bob Tennent <rdtennent@tennent.ca> - 2025-12-22 15:53 +0000
Re: Marxist Healthcare( was Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner?) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-12-22 01:54 -0500
Re: Marxist Healthcare( was Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner?) Bob Tennent <rdtennent@tennent.ca> - 2025-12-22 15:57 +0000
Re: Marxist Healthcare( was Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner?) Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-12-22 08:49 -0800
Re: Marxist Healthcare( was Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-22 19:16 +0000
Re: Marxist Healthcare (was Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner?) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-12-22 21:24 +0000
Re: Marxist Healthcare( was Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-12-22 19:47 +0000
Re: Marxist Healthcare Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-23 11:02 +0000
Re: Marxist Healthcare Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-12-23 11:38 -0800
Re: Marxist Healthcare The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-23 20:23 +0000
Re: Marxist Healthcare Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-23 22:41 +0000
Re: Marxist Healthcare The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-24 12:23 +0000
Re: Marxist Healthcare rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-12-23 23:42 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-12-20 08:33 -0500
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-12-21 04:40 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-12-21 19:59 -0500
Ozempic... "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-12-26 22:24 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-12-04 22:47 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-12-05 00:15 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-12-04 22:48 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-12-05 00:14 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-12-04 22:47 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-12-05 00:16 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-12-03 14:41 -0800
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-12-04 03:05 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? vallor <vallor@vallor.earth> - 2025-12-07 04:01 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-12-08 02:32 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? vallor <vallor@vallor.earth> - 2025-12-08 04:36 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? vallor <vallor@vallor.earth> - 2025-12-08 14:30 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2025-12-08 23:21 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-09 10:01 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-12-10 01:37 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2025-12-10 18:13 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-12-10 20:06 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-12-12 07:44 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2025-12-12 22:39 +1100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-12 12:18 +0000
SYSCALL "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-12-10 14:01 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-12-10 01:37 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-20 23:01 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-21 09:58 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-11-23 03:19 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-23 05:21 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-11-23 19:01 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-11-23 23:23 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-23 23:41 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-11-24 00:39 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-23 23:46 -0500
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-11-24 15:45 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-24 20:59 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? ALB <alb@lupinedb.org> - 2025-11-25 19:38 -0500
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-26 13:35 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-11-26 15:12 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-11-26 15:10 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-16 15:14 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-11-16 02:56 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-11-16 05:40 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-16 15:13 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-11-20 22:23 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-21 13:05 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-11-21 15:35 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-11-23 03:19 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-11-23 05:16 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-11-23 23:23 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-11-24 00:33 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> - 2025-11-23 03:19 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-23 22:05 +0100
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2025-11-24 02:24 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-14 00:04 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? 🇵🇱Jacek Marcin Jaworski🇵🇱 <jaworski1978@adres.pl> - 2025-09-14 06:34 +0200
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? 🇵🇱Jacek Marcin Jaworski🇵🇱 <jaworski1978@adres.pl> - 2025-09-14 06:48 +0200
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-14 06:37 +0000
Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-09-14 08:00 -0500
Re: What Thinks Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> - 2025-09-13 22:24 +0000
Re: What Thinks Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-14 13:38 +0200
Re: What Thinks Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-09-14 12:53 +0000
Re: What Thinks Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-13 11:02 -0400
Re: What Thinks Thou Of LO Donate Banner? vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-09-13 17:02 +0000
Re: What Thinks Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-09-13 18:23 +0000
Re: What Thinks Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Tyrone <none@none.none> - 2025-09-14 00:12 +0000
Re: What Thinks Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> - 2025-09-14 08:45 +0000
Re: What Thinks Thou Of LO Donate Banner? "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-09-14 05:01 -0400
Re: What Thinks Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Farley Flud <fflud@gnu.rocks> - 2025-09-14 13:18 +0000
Page 3 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 11 Next page →
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-12 02:59 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? |
| Message-ID | <e96dulxnku.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #77352 |
On 2025-11-12 00:38, Gremlin wrote: > "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> > news:ia2kplxk9h.ln2@Telcontar.valinor Mon, 15 Sep 2025 00:13:38 GMT in > comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: > >> On 2025-09-14 10:01, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>> On 13/09/2025 23:26, Computer Nerd Kev wrote: >>>> Look at the last table which is supposed to indicate the companies >>>> contributing to maintenance - which is effectively control over the >>>> code others contribute. It's still mainly "huge corps" >>> >>> Who else is interested in an alternative and free standard to Microsoft >>> Office? >>> If you want to disseminate a finished document, you do it as a PDF. >>> Only documents that require much evolution and editing are circulated as >>> 'source'. >>> Only big companies do that. >>> In terms of formatted documents anyway. Let's not introduce plain text >>> source code. >> >> In the 2000 we were sharing .doc files at Lucent, via exchange email. >> The IT people did not like it, because the size of mail folders exploded >> and the servers could barely cope. > > The IT people probably didn't appreciate the easy malware entry vector you > supplied either. .doc files with macros enabled was a a very good thing for > the VXers who specialized in word macro viruses. Or would use the wm aspect > to get a binary onto your workstation and with no additional effort by you, > hopefully, gain access to more interesting targets. The binaries had more > capabilities most of the time. A evil doc would have first to get inside the network somehow. And supposedly the mail server would scan every email for malware before accepting it. They were pretty paranoid those people, for the time. Things that I new and I remember: windows were antitempest, wifi got prohibited. Login was a code that rotated once per minute on a small gadget with a display plus a remembered code. >> The docs were sent to multiple recipients. And each reply saying "got >> it" resent the same documents back and forth multiplied many times. It >> was crazy. > > It was that general attitude with the .doc files that allowed Melissa to do > as well as it did. > >> IT wanted we sent links to shared folders instead. Preaching to the walls. > > It was safer from the POV of trying to keep actual viruses off your > workstations and eventually into the network itself. > The easiest way into a larger target has always been the workstations and > the users in control of them. From current times, when I wanted to share a file with some corporate user, say at a bank, or the doctor at the NHS, they said no to an USB stick. Email it, please. Because that way, files are scanned and vetted by IT. An USB is simply prohibited, very unsafe. Would have to be manually scanned by some official. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-12 03:23 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? |
| Message-ID | <mnict0F5v4aU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #77355 |
On Wed, 12 Nov 2025 02:59:42 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: > From current times, when I wanted to share a file with some corporate > user, say at a bank, or the doctor at the NHS, they said no to an USB > stick. Email it, please. Because that way, files are scanned and vetted > by IT. An USB is simply prohibited, very unsafe. Would have to be > manually scanned by some official. Who might be pwned. https://medium.com/trabe/rubber-ducky-learning-about-keystroke- injection-324f462f80fa The basic theory of operation is the the ducky says 'Hi, I'm a HID' when it's plugged in like any USB keyboard. And then it starts typing at 6000 wpm. There are some amusing videos where one is used as a prank rather than completely maliciously.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-14 14:18 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? |
| Message-ID | <ppmjulx6lc.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #77356 |
On 2025-11-12 04:23, rbowman wrote: > On Wed, 12 Nov 2025 02:59:42 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: > >> From current times, when I wanted to share a file with some corporate >> user, say at a bank, or the doctor at the NHS, they said no to an USB >> stick. Email it, please. Because that way, files are scanned and vetted >> by IT. An USB is simply prohibited, very unsafe. Would have to be >> manually scanned by some official. > > Who might be pwned. > > https://medium.com/trabe/rubber-ducky-learning-about-keystroke- > injection-324f462f80fa > > The basic theory of operation is the the ducky says 'Hi, I'm a HID' when > it's plugged in like any USB keyboard. And then it starts typing at 6000 > wpm. There are some amusing videos where one is used as a prank rather > than completely maliciously. Yes, I know about those things. How common are those things, in the real world? -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-14 19:43 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? |
| Message-ID | <mnpf30Fbcr3U3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #77524 |
On Fri, 14 Nov 2025 14:18:17 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2025-11-12 04:23, rbowman wrote: >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2025 02:59:42 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> >>> From current times, when I wanted to share a file with some >>> corporate >>> user, say at a bank, or the doctor at the NHS, they said no to an USB >>> stick. Email it, please. Because that way, files are scanned and >>> vetted by IT. An USB is simply prohibited, very unsafe. Would have to >>> be manually scanned by some official. >> >> Who might be pwned. >> >> https://medium.com/trabe/rubber-ducky-learning-about-keystroke- >> injection-324f462f80fa >> >> The basic theory of operation is the the ducky says 'Hi, I'm a HID' >> when it's plugged in like any USB keyboard. And then it starts typing >> at 6000 wpm. There are some amusing videos where one is used as a prank >> rather than completely maliciously. > > Yes, I know about those things. > > How common are those things, in the real world? Common enough you don't want to try to see what's on the USB stick you found in the parking lot. They aren't a huge threat compared to other attack surfaces. However https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet Somehow Stuxnet got to what supposedly was an air-gapped Iranian system. Nobody is talking how it got there.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-14 22:20 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? |
| Message-ID | <61jkulxsit.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #77541 |
On 2025-11-14 20:43, rbowman wrote: > On Fri, 14 Nov 2025 14:18:17 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: > >> On 2025-11-12 04:23, rbowman wrote: >>> On Wed, 12 Nov 2025 02:59:42 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: >>> >>>> From current times, when I wanted to share a file with some >>>> corporate >>>> user, say at a bank, or the doctor at the NHS, they said no to an USB >>>> stick. Email it, please. Because that way, files are scanned and >>>> vetted by IT. An USB is simply prohibited, very unsafe. Would have to >>>> be manually scanned by some official. >>> >>> Who might be pwned. >>> >>> https://medium.com/trabe/rubber-ducky-learning-about-keystroke- >>> injection-324f462f80fa >>> >>> The basic theory of operation is the the ducky says 'Hi, I'm a HID' >>> when it's plugged in like any USB keyboard. And then it starts typing >>> at 6000 wpm. There are some amusing videos where one is used as a prank >>> rather than completely maliciously. >> >> Yes, I know about those things. >> >> How common are those things, in the real world? > > Common enough you don't want to try to see what's on the USB stick you > found in the parking lot. They aren't a huge threat compared to other > attack surfaces. However > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet > > Somehow Stuxnet got to what supposedly was an air-gapped Iranian system. > Nobody is talking how it got there. Yes, I know about that one. But that one was a targeted attack. However, if I find an USB stick, I'd want to find its owner to return it. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-12 05:11 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? |
| Message-ID | <XnsB3951DD44961HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5> |
| In reply to | #77355 |
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> news:e96dulxnku.ln2@Telcontar.valinor Wed, 12 Nov 2025 01:59:42 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: > A evil doc would have first to get inside the network somehow. And > supposedly the mail server would scan every email for malware before > accepting it. A virus scanner can only scan for things it already knows, or using hueristics, things it might think are viral in nature. If it doesn't trigger the hueristics and it's not a known to your virus scanner sample, it gets right past it and is free to do whatever it was written to do. Malware is a rather generic term, too. Viruses are a special subset. They actually replicate, intentionally. Most Malware is in the form of a trojan. It doesn't replicate. > They were pretty paranoid those people, for the time. Things that I new > and I remember: windows were antitempest, wifi got prohibited. Login > was a code that rotated once per minute on a small gadget with a display > plus a remembered code. That doesn't really do much good if you allow .doc files and trust your security to an antivirus scanner in that respect. It was trivial to get around them. Windows is a very well known and highly exploited operating system. It's been that way for decades. > From current times, when I wanted to share a file with some corporate > user, say at a bank, or the doctor at the NHS, they said no to an USB > stick. Email it, please. Because that way, files are scanned and vetted > by IT. An USB is simply prohibited, very unsafe. Would have to be > manually scanned by some official. A virus scanner is only as good as it's last definitions. And, if it has no match for the viral code, and the viral code is written well enough not to trigger a hueristics hit, the virus gets right past your defenses. It's executed with the same user rights you have. Using exploits it can gain access rights you do not have. The Melissa virus didn't even use exploits - but had no issues spreading like a wildfire. Entirely thanks to people with your mindset at the time. -- Liar, lawyer; mirror show me, what's the difference? Kangaroo done hung the guilty with the innocent Liar, lawyer; mirror for ya', what's the difference? Kangaroo be stoned. He's guilty as the government
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-12 06:29 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? |
| Message-ID | <69142941$1$20$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> |
| In reply to | #77373 |
On Nov 11, 2025 at 10:11:00 PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote <XnsB3951DD44961HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>: > "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> > news:e96dulxnku.ln2@Telcontar.valinor Wed, 12 Nov 2025 01:59:42 GMT in > comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: > > >> A evil doc would have first to get inside the network somehow. And >> supposedly the mail server would scan every email for malware before >> accepting it. > > A virus scanner can only scan for things it already knows, or using hueristics, > things it might think are viral in nature. As opposed to what? -- It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-12 06:46 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? |
| Message-ID | <10f1afr$18jot$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77380 |
On 2025-11-12, Brock McNuggets wrote: > On Nov 11, 2025 at 10:11:00 PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote > <XnsB3951DD44961HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>: > >> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> >> news:e96dulxnku.ln2@Telcontar.valinor Wed, 12 Nov 2025 01:59:42 GMT in >> comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: >> >> >>> A evil doc would have first to get inside the network somehow. And >>> supposedly the mail server would scan every email for malware before >>> accepting it. >> >> A virus scanner can only scan for things it already knows, or using hueristics, >> things it might think are viral in nature. > > As opposed to what? I'll guess that is as opposed to the mythic omniscient antivirus that catches every virus, which is a known, proven impossibility. -- Nuno Silva
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-12 14:14 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? |
| Message-ID | <6914963a$0$21$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> |
| In reply to | #77384 |
On Nov 11, 2025 at 11:46:16 PM MST, "Nuno Silva" wrote <10f1afr$18jot$1@dont-email.me>: > On 2025-11-12, Brock McNuggets wrote: > >> On Nov 11, 2025 at 10:11:00 PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote >> <XnsB3951DD44961HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>: >> >>> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> >>> news:e96dulxnku.ln2@Telcontar.valinor Wed, 12 Nov 2025 01:59:42 GMT in >>> comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: >>> >>> >>>> A evil doc would have first to get inside the network somehow. And >>>> supposedly the mail server would scan every email for malware before >>>> accepting it. >>> >>> A virus scanner can only scan for things it already knows, or using hueristics, >>> things it might think are viral in nature. >> >> As opposed to what? > > I'll guess that is as opposed to the mythic omniscient antivirus that > catches every virus, which is a known, proven impossibility. LOL! Fair. -- It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-13 02:06 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? |
| Message-ID | <XnsB395D6B63B278HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5> |
| In reply to | #77384 |
Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> news:10f1afr$18jot$1@dont-email.me Wed, 12 Nov 2025 06:46:16 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: > On 2025-11-12, Brock McNuggets wrote: > >> On Nov 11, 2025 at 10:11:00 PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote >> <XnsB3951DD44961HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>: >> >>> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> >>> news:e96dulxnku.ln2@Telcontar.valinor Wed, 12 Nov 2025 01:59:42 GMT in >>> comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: >>> >>> >>>> A evil doc would have first to get inside the network somehow. And >>>> supposedly the mail server would scan every email for malware before >>>> accepting it. >>> >>> A virus scanner can only scan for things it already knows, or using >>> hueristics, things it might think are viral in nature. >> >> As opposed to what? > > I'll guess that is as opposed to the mythic omniscient antivirus that > catches every virus, which is a known, proven impossibility. Correct! Malware scanners provide a very real false sense of security. I had people scan my Toadie virus several times with different ones and openly disagree with other users reporting something might be up. 'My virus scanner said it's clean!" "Call it warthog, I scanned it with xx many scanners and they all said it's fine!" Of course they did. The scanners didn't have a signature for it yet because the companies responsible for writing them didn't have a sample to get one from yet. They can only report on things they have signatures for, or, due to a heuristics hit, thinks might be a problem. Heuristics were never a problem for me. Thunderbyte antivirus was one of my favorites back in the days of DOS and early Windows. It had one hell of a heuristics engine that would provide useful details. If you triggered it, it would tell you what was being triggered and why. Very useful information when you're writing and testing your next creation. I knew the latest and greatest antivirus programs wouldn't touch me when I released mine - I already scanned it against them. It would be several days before they even got a start. Which gave my creation time to make ITW list. bragging rights you know. -- Liar, lawyer; mirror show me, what's the difference? Kangaroo done hung the guilty with the innocent Liar, lawyer; mirror for ya', what's the difference? Kangaroo be stoned. He's guilty as the government
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-13 02:14 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? |
| Message-ID | <69153f1a$1$5012$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> |
| In reply to | #77440 |
On Nov 12, 2025 at 7:06:25 PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote <XnsB395D6B63B278HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>: > Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> news:10f1afr$18jot$1@dont-email.me > Wed, 12 Nov 2025 06:46:16 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: > >> On 2025-11-12, Brock McNuggets wrote: >> >>> On Nov 11, 2025 at 10:11:00 PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote >>> <XnsB3951DD44961HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>: >>> >>>> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> >>>> news:e96dulxnku.ln2@Telcontar.valinor Wed, 12 Nov 2025 01:59:42 GMT in >>>> comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> A evil doc would have first to get inside the network somehow. And >>>>> supposedly the mail server would scan every email for malware before >>>>> accepting it. >>>> >>>> A virus scanner can only scan for things it already knows, or using >>>> hueristics, things it might think are viral in nature. >>> >>> As opposed to what? >> >> I'll guess that is as opposed to the mythic omniscient antivirus that >> catches every virus, which is a known, proven impossibility. > > Correct! What would we do without you to figure this out? LOL! > Malware scanners provide a very real false sense of security. I had people > scan my Toadie virus several times with different ones and openly disagree > with other users reporting something might be up. 'My virus scanner said > it's clean!" "Call it warthog, I scanned it with xx many scanners and they > all said it's fine!" Of course they did. The scanners didn't have a > signature for it yet because the companies responsible for writing them > didn't have a sample to get one from yet. > > They can only report on things they have signatures for, or, due to a > heuristics hit, thinks might be a problem. Heuristics were never a problem > for me. > > Thunderbyte antivirus was one of my favorites back in the days of DOS and > early Windows. It had one hell of a heuristics engine that would provide > useful details. If you triggered it, it would tell you what was being > triggered and why. Very useful information when you're writing and testing > your next creation. > > I knew the latest and greatest antivirus programs wouldn't touch me when I > released mine - I already scanned it against them. It would be several > days before they even got a start. Which gave my creation time to make ITW > list. bragging rights you know. Q: Give a psych analysis of the author of this text: A: This author is an intelligent but morally detached individual who romanticizes malicious hacking as a craft and measures self-worth through outsmarting others. Their tone reflects pride, nostalgia, and contempt, not introspection. Psychologically, they fit the profile of an ego-driven hacker archetype — someone who justifies unethical behavior through the lens of technical artistry and superiority. They don’t merely understand malware — they identify with it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- More at the link: https://chatgpt.com/share/69153f5a-78e4-800c-ad9d-9d584e70c176 -- It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-13 11:01 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? |
| Message-ID | <10f4dqu$22ui0$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77441 |
On 2025-11-13, Brock McNuggets wrote: > On Nov 12, 2025 at 7:06:25 PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote > <XnsB395D6B63B278HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>: > >> Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> news:10f1afr$18jot$1@dont-email.me >> Wed, 12 Nov 2025 06:46:16 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: >> >>> On 2025-11-12, Brock McNuggets wrote: >>> >>>> On Nov 11, 2025 at 10:11:00 PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote >>>> <XnsB3951DD44961HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>: >>>> >>>>> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> >>>>> news:e96dulxnku.ln2@Telcontar.valinor Wed, 12 Nov 2025 01:59:42 GMT in >>>>> comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> A evil doc would have first to get inside the network somehow. And >>>>>> supposedly the mail server would scan every email for malware before >>>>>> accepting it. >>>>> >>>>> A virus scanner can only scan for things it already knows, or using >>>>> hueristics, things it might think are viral in nature. >>>> >>>> As opposed to what? >>> >>> I'll guess that is as opposed to the mythic omniscient antivirus that >>> catches every virus, which is a known, proven impossibility. >> >> Correct! > > What would we do without you to figure this out? LOL! We'd probably have to ask Alonzo Church or Alan Turing to publish their findings. -- Nuno Silva
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-13 13:39 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? |
| Message-ID | <6915dfa2$0$3784$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> |
| In reply to | #77472 |
On Nov 13, 2025 at 4:01:47 AM MST, "Nuno Silva" wrote <10f4dqu$22ui0$2@dont-email.me>: > On 2025-11-13, Brock McNuggets wrote: > >> On Nov 12, 2025 at 7:06:25 PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote >> <XnsB395D6B63B278HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>: >> >>> Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> news:10f1afr$18jot$1@dont-email.me >>> Wed, 12 Nov 2025 06:46:16 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: >>> >>>> On 2025-11-12, Brock McNuggets wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Nov 11, 2025 at 10:11:00 PM MST, "Gremlin" wrote >>>>> <XnsB3951DD44961HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5>: >>>>> >>>>>> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> >>>>>> news:e96dulxnku.ln2@Telcontar.valinor Wed, 12 Nov 2025 01:59:42 GMT in >>>>>> comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> A evil doc would have first to get inside the network somehow. And >>>>>>> supposedly the mail server would scan every email for malware before >>>>>>> accepting it. >>>>>> >>>>>> A virus scanner can only scan for things it already knows, or using >>>>>> hueristics, things it might think are viral in nature. >>>>> >>>>> As opposed to what? >>>> >>>> I'll guess that is as opposed to the mythic omniscient antivirus that >>>> catches every virus, which is a known, proven impossibility. >>> >>> Correct! >> >> What would we do without you to figure this out? LOL! > > We'd probably have to ask Alonzo Church or Alan Turing to publish their > findings. :) -- It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-14 14:20 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? |
| Message-ID | <ctmjulxv8j.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #77373 |
On 2025-11-12 06:11, Gremlin wrote: > "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> > news:e96dulxnku.ln2@Telcontar.valinor Wed, 12 Nov 2025 01:59:42 GMT in > comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: > > >> A evil doc would have first to get inside the network somehow. And >> supposedly the mail server would scan every email for malware before >> accepting it. > > A virus scanner can only scan for things it already knows, or using hueristics, > things it might think are viral in nature. If it doesn't trigger the > hueristics and it's not a known to your virus scanner sample, it gets right > past it and is free to do whatever it was written to do. Malware is a rather > generic term, too. Viruses are a special subset. They actually replicate, > intentionally. Most Malware is in the form of a trojan. It doesn't replicate. > >> They were pretty paranoid those people, for the time. Things that I new >> and I remember: windows were antitempest, wifi got prohibited. Login >> was a code that rotated once per minute on a small gadget with a display >> plus a remembered code. > > That doesn't really do much good if you allow .doc files and trust your > security to an antivirus scanner in that respect. It was trivial to get around > them. Windows is a very well known and highly exploited operating system. It's > been that way for decades. > >> From current times, when I wanted to share a file with some corporate >> user, say at a bank, or the doctor at the NHS, they said no to an USB >> stick. Email it, please. Because that way, files are scanned and vetted >> by IT. An USB is simply prohibited, very unsafe. Would have to be >> manually scanned by some official. > > A virus scanner is only as good as it's last definitions. And, if it has no > match for the viral code, and the viral code is written well enough not to > trigger a hueristics hit, the virus gets right past your defenses. It's > executed with the same user rights you have. Using exploits it can gain access > rights you do not have. > > The Melissa virus didn't even use exploits - but had no issues spreading like > a wildfire. Entirely thanks to people with your mindset at the time. > > The point is, it keeps IT happy. About docs, you can block any doc that contains macros. No need to scan for known virii. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-15 20:50 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? |
| Message-ID | <XnsB398A1258BA2HT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5> |
| In reply to | #77523 |
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> news:ctmjulxv8j.ln2@Telcontar.valinor Fri, 14 Nov 2025 13:20:12 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: >> The Melissa virus didn't even use exploits - but had no issues >> spreading like a wildfire. Entirely thanks to people with your mindset >> at the time. >> >> > > > The point is, it keeps IT happy. I'm well aware. They were happy prior to Melissa too. :) Happy and ignorant. > About docs, you can block any doc that > contains macros. No need to scan for known virii. I'm also well aware of this. That said, the macro's are a feature that was overused by a wide margin. I find it doubtful that all of your .doc files were macro free. And why would you bother scanning them if they were? This has been a funny conversation, Carlos. :) -- Liar, lawyer; mirror show me, what's the difference? Kangaroo done hung the guilty with the innocent Liar, lawyer; mirror for ya', what's the difference? Kangaroo be stoned. He's guilty as the government
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-15 22:08 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? |
| Message-ID | <rn6nulxbf4.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #77583 |
On 2025-11-15 21:50, Gremlin wrote: > "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> > news:ctmjulxv8j.ln2@Telcontar.valinor Fri, 14 Nov 2025 13:20:12 GMT in > comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: > > >>> The Melissa virus didn't even use exploits - but had no issues >>> spreading like a wildfire. Entirely thanks to people with your mindset >>> at the time. >>> >>> >> >> >> The point is, it keeps IT happy. > > I'm well aware. They were happy prior to Melissa too. :) Happy and ignorant. > >> About docs, you can block any doc that >> contains macros. No need to scan for known virii. > > I'm also well aware of this. That said, the macro's are a feature that was > overused by a wide margin. I find it doubtful that all of your .doc files were > macro free. And why would you bother scanning them if they were? This has been > a funny conversation, Carlos. :) Yes, all my doc files were macro free. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-16 05:40 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? |
| Message-ID | <XnsB3996E9EC1BFHT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5> |
| In reply to | #77584 |
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> news:rn6nulxbf4.ln2@Telcontar.valinor Sat, 15 Nov 2025 21:08:43 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: > On 2025-11-15 21:50, Gremlin wrote: >> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> >> news:ctmjulxv8j.ln2@Telcontar.valinor Fri, 14 Nov 2025 13:20:12 GMT in >> comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: >> >> >>>> The Melissa virus didn't even use exploits - but had no issues >>>> spreading like a wildfire. Entirely thanks to people with your >>>> mindset at the time. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> The point is, it keeps IT happy. >> >> I'm well aware. They were happy prior to Melissa too. :) Happy and >> ignorant. >> >>> About docs, you can block any doc that >>> contains macros. No need to scan for known virii. >> >> I'm also well aware of this. That said, the macro's are a feature that >> was overused by a wide margin. I find it doubtful that all of your .doc >> files were macro free. And why would you bother scanning them if they >> were? This has been a funny conversation, Carlos. :) > > Yes, all my doc files were macro free. Fuck. Are you trying to be like Snit or something? Are you really claiming that all the doc files you passed around with your co workers were macro free? If so, why was it necessary to waste clock cycles scanning them in the first place? And risking mailbox corruption as they did? Surely you meant that all file attachments were scanned for known malware and that your IT department wasn't singling out .doc files?!? You really don't know much/nearly anything about the subject do you? That's fine too. Malware is a bit of a niche specialty for those who do. I have enjoyed the conversation though. It's been hilarious. -- Liar, lawyer; mirror show me, what's the difference? Kangaroo done hung the guilty with the innocent Liar, lawyer; mirror for ya', what's the difference? Kangaroo be stoned. He's guilty as the government
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-16 11:05 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? |
| Message-ID | <10fcb5j$3enl$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77622 |
On 2025-11-16, Gremlin wrote: > "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> > news:rn6nulxbf4.ln2@Telcontar.valinor Sat, 15 Nov 2025 21:08:43 GMT in > comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: > >> On 2025-11-15 21:50, Gremlin wrote: >>> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> >>> news:ctmjulxv8j.ln2@Telcontar.valinor Fri, 14 Nov 2025 13:20:12 GMT in >>> comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: [...] >>>> About docs, you can block any doc that >>>> contains macros. No need to scan for known virii. >>> >>> I'm also well aware of this. That said, the macro's are a feature that >>> was overused by a wide margin. I find it doubtful that all of your .doc >>> files were macro free. And why would you bother scanning them if they >>> were? This has been a funny conversation, Carlos. :) >> >> Yes, all my doc files were macro free. While this will certainly depend on the tech culture and habits of the environment you're in, and on the features used, I can second that, while having been forced to use MS Office formats a long time ago in an OS far far away, I don't think I've ever encountered an external document I needed to open that had macros. > Fuck. Are you trying to be like Snit or something? Are you really claiming > that all the doc files you passed around with your co workers were macro > free? If so, why was it necessary to waste clock cycles scanning them in the > first place? And risking mailbox corruption as they did? Surely you meant > that all file attachments were scanned for known malware and that your IT > department wasn't singling out .doc files?!? You'd need to scan them all to at least known which ones to scan, if you weren't going to just scan them all. Unless you filtered on extensions, which is probably not a good idea to begin with. > You really don't know much/nearly anything about the subject do you? That's > fine too. Malware is a bit of a niche specialty for those who do. I have > enjoyed the conversation though. It's been hilarious. I did warn you guys, no feeding the mogwai after midnight, and no getting them wet... -- Nuno Silva
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-17 01:33 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? |
| Message-ID | <j47qulx43j.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #77626 |
On 2025-11-16 12:05, Nuno Silva wrote: > On 2025-11-16, Gremlin wrote: >> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> >> news:rn6nulxbf4.ln2@Telcontar.valinor Sat, 15 Nov 2025 21:08:43 GMT in >> comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: >> >>> On 2025-11-15 21:50, Gremlin wrote: >>>> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> >>>> news:ctmjulxv8j.ln2@Telcontar.valinor Fri, 14 Nov 2025 13:20:12 GMT in >>>> comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: > [...] >>>>> About docs, you can block any doc that >>>>> contains macros. No need to scan for known virii. >>>> >>>> I'm also well aware of this. That said, the macro's are a feature that >>>> was overused by a wide margin. I find it doubtful that all of your .doc >>>> files were macro free. And why would you bother scanning them if they >>>> were? This has been a funny conversation, Carlos. :) >>> >>> Yes, all my doc files were macro free. > > While this will certainly depend on the tech culture and habits of the > environment you're in, and on the features used, I can second that, > while having been forced to use MS Office formats a long time ago in an > OS far far away, I don't think I've ever encountered an external > document I needed to open that had macros. I did, once that I remember, but it was with the ancestor of OpenOffice, I think it was StarOffice. When creating a letter with a template, some parts were pre-filled. I found later that the document was saved with a macro, and all the derivative copies of it inherited the macro. At some point, when opening the file, the program asked if I wanted to allow running the macros, which surprised me a lot. Of course, there was no danger, the file was never shared. The template created macros in the saved document. What for, I have no idea. The template was distributed with the software for installation. But I never created M$ documents with macros in the job place. I never bothered to learn how to do that, nor did I have a reason to do so. Thus I'm sure. Same that I'm sure the IT department had the appropriate filters in the mail server, with the knowledge of the time. There was never a problem while I was working there. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gremlin <nobody@haph.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-20 22:23 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? |
| Message-ID | <XnsB39DB0F74638CHT1@cF04o3ON7k2lx05.lLC.9r5> |
| In reply to | #77626 |
Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> news:10fcb5j$3enl$1@dont-email.me Sun, 16 Nov 2025 11:05:21 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote: > While this will certainly depend on the tech culture and habits of the > environment you're in, and on the features used, I can second that, > while having been forced to use MS Office formats a long time ago in an > OS far far away, I don't think I've ever encountered an external > document I needed to open that had macros. I never thought macro support was a good idea. MS disagreed and many corporations and end users used the technology. > You'd need to scan them all to at least known which ones to scan, if you > weren't going to just scan them all. Unless you filtered on extensions, > which is probably not a good idea to begin with. You can't depend on a files extension to actually be what the file is. You can reduce scan times by looking for specific bytes within the file to determine what it actually is and if a full scan is actually necessary or not though. -- Liar, lawyer; mirror show me, what's the difference? Kangaroo done hung the guilty with the innocent Liar, lawyer; mirror for ya', what's the difference? Kangaroo be stoned. He's guilty as the government
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web