The Shoes of the Fisherman's Wife Are Some Jive-Ass Slippers

tpot (at) frungy . org

rss

2004
Months
Apr

Wed, 28 Apr 2004

Results 1 - 10 of about 128,000 for java rant

mbp stumbles across a veritable treasure trove of rants. My favourite is the first hit. Here's a sample:

"The JavaCPU is thus extremely simple, so as to be implementable with minimal silicon and minimal research. Compared to a modern architecture like the Alpha, the JavaCPU looks like something an undergrad dreamed up in the men's room based on the mathematical elegance of two urinal cakes, one stacked upon the other."

The author actually makes a couple of good points. One is that there is nothing particular innovative about Java, but flies off on a bit of a tangent about the bytecode representation. I think the Java language introduced a bunch of useful programming ideas that aren't present in C/C++ to a larger audience so it wasn't as complete a loss as the author describes it. (Don't get me started about threads though). The bizzare licensing of the JRE also comes up as an issue which is more relevant now after SUN's recent cave in to Microsoft. posted at: 22:46 | path: /humour | permanent link to this entry

Sun, 25 Apr 2004

Best of Spam Subject Lines

  • Get Your Free Dog Treats Today
  • Debt Consolidation with a Christian Perspective
  • PEN1S Launcher
  • Cash in on other people's success
  • Lower Your Monthly Mortgage Payments
posted at: 11:28 | path: /humour | permanent link to this entry

Fri, 23 Apr 2004

GPL

From the ntop website:

ntop is distributed under the GNU GPL. In order to be entitled to download ntop you must accept the GNU license.

posted at: 16:14 | path: /software | permanent link to this entry

Wed, 21 Apr 2004

Virus Checker Emails

From the letters page on The Register:

It is Monday morning ... and I'm really pissed off.

Why?

Well, our incoming email has been disrupted this weekend - this is the second time this year, and we're only up to April.

No it's not a server failure at our ISP, and no it's not a virus (not directly anyway) ...we've effectively had a denial of service on our incoming business email, because of all the auto-response emails kindly advising us that a message we never sent included a virus.

If you are a Sys-Admin, or Keeper-of-the-Mail-Server, I would ask you to read this very carefully - there's some important stuff further down that could affect you ...and if you happen to be feeling sharp pains about your person, this is because I'm busy throwing darts at your effigy.

Look - I'm genuinely pleased that you've managed to set up your mail servers so they automatically trap a live virus - excellent, well done!

In fact my pleasure is not unlike that of a proud father whose offspring has just managed his/her first poo into the potty instead of all over the floor. But my pleasure has waned as you continue to tell me about it - repeatedly.

So, let's establish a couple of facts...

1. Here at "Visible Form" we do NOT send out infected emails - ever. We have NEVER done so, and will do our utmost in the future to ensure that this remains the case. Like you, we run up-to-date virus checkers on incoming and outgoing, we have a hardware firewall, and our mail server ISP does NOT have an open relay - in fact we can only send email via this ISP if we connect directly to their system. The ISP we use for our day-to-day connection will only allow us to use their mail servers and 'spoof' our own FROM address if we've already asked for (and got) permission, which includes providing evidence that we own the domains in question.

2. Most viruses spoof the FROM email address.

Do I really need to explain to you that this means the virus-containing email DID NOT come from the FROM address? You do know this, don't you?

You do KNOW this?

DO YOU KNOW THIS??

These are facts - read them slowly and repeatedly until they sink in.

Write this in big letters and put it up on the wall: "most VIRUS emails SPOOF the FROM address".

I am pleased you've pooed in your potty - sorry, trapped a live virus - but it was not sent from here, and I do not need to know about it. I especially do not need to know about it several hundred, even thousand, times.

You see, what has happened here is that the virus is no longer the problem - we can all trap those if we have a mind to ...the real problem is YOU - for every virus your systems detect you automatically generate a reply to the email FROM address - unfortunately you've gone back to pooing on the floor and making a mess everywhere.

Your action in allowing this state of affairs to continue does absolutely nothing to resolve the real underlying issue of people with unprotected computers, and the virus-writers themselves - instead it is creating its own new problem which has every chance of bringing the internet to a grinding halt in the not-too-distant future.

If you do nothing else today, go now and switch off your auto-response to virus emails. Do it now - never mind Mrs Miggins in Accounts whose macros are not working - switch off the auto-response now ...do it ...NOW!

If all of this fails to move you, or causes a "whatever", let me put it another way...

Fact 1: You are causing me a denial of service with your thousands of auto-response emails.

Fact 2: I know who you are - your auto-response emails identify you.

Fact 3: If you do not fix it, I will talk to your Chairman, MD, Chief Officer and make it very clear that YOU are the cause of this problem.

Go switch it off NOW and I'll put my darts away!

Rob Kirkwood, owner Visible Form, Nottingham (UK)

Heh. Samba's email server is set to swallow virus responder emails if it detects them, as it does with the viruses themselves. I was feeling uncharitable this morning and changed the settings to bounce Norton AntiVirus email responders back to the sender. I figure if they are incompetent enough to send auto-response emails due to forged emails (we even have SPF enabled) then they can eat a bounce. posted at: 13:15 | path: /rants | permanent link to this entry

Tue, 20 Apr 2004

More SCons coolness

People who write shared libraries for x86 often forget to compile everything in the library with -fPIC. On x86 it seems to not matter, but other architectures, ia64 for example, the library will not link.

Scons detects this situation and refuses to build a library containing non-PIC objects. From the manual page:

On some platforms building a shared object requires additional compiler options (e.g. -fPIC for gcc) in addition to those needed to build a normal (static) object, but on some platforms there is no differ- ence between a shared object and a normal (static) one. When there is a difference, SCons will only allow shared objects to be linked into a shared library, and will use a different suffix for shared objects.

Fix the problem, not the symptom! posted at: 16:19 | path: /software/scons | permanent link to this entry

Phew

I just locked myself out of a remotely hosted box. Luckily (?) it was running a Linux kernel susceptible to the mremap() vulnerability so we were able to get back in. I must say though the example exploit code didn't compile, and there was no documentation. Typical open source rubbish. posted at: 16:17 | path: /computers/security | permanent link to this entry

Sat, 17 Apr 2004

Microsoft Does The Impossible

From: Jeremy Allison 
To: samba@samba.org, samba-technical@samba.org
Subject: Microsoft restores MultipleUsersOnConnection registry entry for
        Windows 2000 Terminal servers

Hi all,

This is important news for Samba users who also have Windows 2000
terminal server. You may recall that Windows NT Terminal servers
had a registry entry, MultipleUsersOnConnection, which would cause
Terminal server to open a new TCP session for every logged on user.

Microsoft previously steadfastly refused to make this available
for Windows 2000 terminal servers, this causing poorer performance
with single-threaded Samba servers. As a side note, I was on a
conference call with Microsoft engineers where they claimed it
was technically *impossible* to add this change, due to the
"re-architecturing" of W2K Terminal server.

Well it turns out that corruption of internal data structures in the
Windows redirector (multi-threaded programming is *HARD*) has
forced them to re-introduce this change to Windows 2000.

Details are here :

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=818528
Now that's innovation! posted at: 09:18 | path: /software/samba | permanent link to this entry

Sat, 03 Apr 2004

You Are Open Source Or You Are Owned By The Man

From Slashdot (by SirChive (229195) on Friday April 02, @08:02AM):

This show us, once again, that Microsoft can and will buy whatever it wants. Sun now lives on the Redmond food chain. They toe the line or, in the end, they die. There is only one way to survive against an entity that controls a bottomless pile of cash. That is to NOT be for sale. Any for-profit enterprise, like Sun, is for sale and the Gates machine can buy whatever it wants. But Gates and his horde can't buy Linux; they can't buy Open Source, they can't buy Free Software. This scares them and, in that, lies our only hope.
I, Cringely also has a similar view about Microsoft, their bottomless pile of cash, and the legal system. He claims that that US$600 million is the amount by which Microsoft increases its cash hoard in two weeks. A parking ticket indeed! posted at: 11:28 | path: /computers/microsoft | permanent link to this entry