PLUG-discuss digest, Vol 1 #1822 - 10 msgs

Top Page
This message is part of the following thread:
Mthe complete thread tree sorted by date
MKevin Brown at <-
M 
Attachments:
Message as email
+ (text/plain)
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Tom Achtenberg
Date:  
Subject: PLUG-discuss digest, Vol 1 #1822 - 10 msgs
James, what is this all about? No one was selling anything. You sent this to a list that has over 100 subscribers.

-----Original Message-----
From: James Tanett [mailto:jamestt@lycos.com]
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 12:49 PM
To:
Subject: Re: PLUG-discuss digest, Vol 1 #1822 - 10 msgs


Please,

I want NEVE4R to hear from you gagin! The majority of the mre than 30 messages were from you. I GUARNTEE I will NEVER BUY ANYTHING FROM YOU!!!!!!!

--

On Thu, 17 Jan 2002 15:42:06
plug-discuss-request wrote:
>Send PLUG-discuss mailing list submissions to
>    

>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>    http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>    

>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
>    

>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of PLUG-discuss digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: FTP Server (Derek Neighbors)
> 2. RE: FTP Server (Tom Achtenberg)
> 3. Re: FTP Server (slr)
> 4. Re: insmod error (slr)
> 5. Re: insmod error (Blake Barnett)
> 6. Re: insmod error (root)
> 7. OpenBSD or Linux Firewall? (Jeffrey Pyne)
> 8. RE: OpenBSD or Linux Firewall? (Tom Achtenberg)
> 9. West side meeting (Chuck Collins)
> 10. RE: OpenBSD or Linux Firewall? (Tom Achtenberg)
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 14:41:54 -0600 (CST)
>From: Derek Neighbors <>
>To: <>
>Subject: Re: FTP Server
>Reply-To:
>
>Having ignored most of this thread I will jump in here an spout up and
>probably be way off base. :)
>
>When I saw thread about 'FTP', the first thought that came to my mind was
>WHY run FTP. As security of FTP is ouchie, but I thought, I will keep my
>holy wars out of this and not respond.
>
>After reading this post, I thought I would say....
>
>"One should never 'flame' it does neither party good". On the other hand
>I think that some of the 'old' timers should help people understand the
>risks of their actions is a 'controlled' manner. Sometimes its a mindset
>thing. Most people would say well I NEED ftp. I have found that seldomly
>is it REALLY necessary, you just have to change your way of thinking.
>
>So in a round about way, I agree with more than one party here I guess. :)
>I think that we were all green behind the ears at one point, and
>regardless of how many times one has been the round block or not been
>around the block we all deserve respect. :) On that note, I think we owe
>it to those that come after us to 'explain' rather than flame the reasons
>we have the 'opinions' we do.
>
>Just thoughts. :)
>
>-derek
>
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 2
>From: Tom Achtenberg <>
>To: "''"
>     <>
>Subject: RE: FTP Server
>Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 13:45:45 -0700
>Reply-To:

>
>Nancy, my comments were not aimed at any specific person but rather at the collective. Dare anyone say they like Red Hat and are not using Debian it seems they get treated like heretics. Heaven forbid anyone feel programmers should get paid for their work instead of giving everything away for free. (Actually meaning software consumers actually PAY for what they use.)
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Nancy Sollars [mailto:dnancy2@qwest.net]
>Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 1:26 PM
>To:
>Subject: Re: FTP Server
>
>
>right I guess i missed Toms post for some reason ..
>
>After reading this one though here is a somewhat happier response ..
>
>The original poster whom i flamed in a post regarding a security issue
>looked like a firewall kinda post said "This may not be the right thing to
>do and flame me if you will" or words to that effect ..
>
>I saw no such Flames so after i saw the issue with WU i thought ok you got
>away with it once so hehe here you go .. flamed for using WU ( In a nice way
>of course ) .. the post about what my friend said in Bristol about being a
>muppet to use it was because the box he was testing actually got rooted
>within 1.5 hours of going live online ..
>
>To me that points out that there are critical mistakes in the way WU works
>to allow this to happen.
>
>and I for one would not like to see anyone get their box owned by other
>users especially SkRiPtK1dDi33's.
>
>so il say sorry to the original poster to the list ...
>
>Nige
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Matt Alexander" <>
>To: <>
>Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 1:13 PM
>Subject: RE: FTP Server
>
>
>> Good points, Tom. There often times is a rather arrogant attitude amongst
>> the "tech elite" for whatever reason, and it tends to hurt the overall
>> cause of what many of us are working towards accomplishing. Since the
>> PLUG list is composed of many different personalities, I hope that no one
>> gives up on Linux simply because of the negative attitudes of a few
>> members. There are a lot more of us that really do want to help. :-)
>> ~M
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 17 Jan 2002, Tom Achtenberg wrote:
>>
>> > Thanks Nige. I for one am getting quite tired of all the "holier than
>thou" flaming from a few of the members who think they know it all and their
>way is the only way. If some of you do not want to help us newbies than
>just delete our messages. You don't have to flame us and talk down at us
>like some of you do. Remember, you all were new to Linux at one time too.
>>
>> ________________________________________________
>> See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't
>post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>>
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>
>
>________________________________________________
>See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>
>PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 13:45:20 -0700
>From: "slr" <>
>To:
>Subject: Re: FTP Server
>Reply-To:
>
>it seems as though, some find it hard to apologize or admit there wrong.
>
>slr
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Nancy Sollars" <>
>To: <>
>Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 1:26 PM
>Subject: Re: FTP Server
>
>
>> right I guess i missed Toms post for some reason ..
>>
>> After reading this one though here is a somewhat happier response ..
>>
>> The original poster whom i flamed in a post regarding a security issue
>> looked like a firewall kinda post said "This may not be the right thing to
>> do and flame me if you will" or words to that effect ..
>>
>> I saw no such Flames so after i saw the issue with WU i thought ok you got
>> away with it once so hehe here you go .. flamed for using WU ( In a nice
>way
>> of course ) .. the post about what my friend said in Bristol about being a
>> muppet to use it was because the box he was testing actually got rooted
>> within 1.5 hours of going live online ..
>>
>> To me that points out that there are critical mistakes in the way WU works
>> to allow this to happen.
>>
>> and I for one would not like to see anyone get their box owned by other
>> users especially SkRiPtK1dDi33's.
>>
>> so il say sorry to the original poster to the list ...
>>
>> Nige
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Matt Alexander" <>
>> To: <>
>> Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 1:13 PM
>> Subject: RE: FTP Server
>>
>>
>> > Good points, Tom. There often times is a rather arrogant attitude
>amongst
>> > the "tech elite" for whatever reason, and it tends to hurt the overall
>> > cause of what many of us are working towards accomplishing. Since the
>> > PLUG list is composed of many different personalities, I hope that no
>one
>> > gives up on Linux simply because of the negative attitudes of a few
>> > members. There are a lot more of us that really do want to help. :-)
>> > ~M
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, 17 Jan 2002, Tom Achtenberg wrote:
>> >
>> > > Thanks Nige. I for one am getting quite tired of all the "holier than
>> thou" flaming from a few of the members who think they know it all and
>their
>> way is the only way. If some of you do not want to help us newbies than
>> just delete our messages. You don't have to flame us and talk down at us
>> like some of you do. Remember, you all were new to Linux at one time too.
>> >
>> > ________________________________________________
>> > See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't
>> post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>> >
>> > PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>> > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>> >
>>
>> ________________________________________________
>> See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't
>post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>>
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>
>
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 4
>Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 13:46:57 -0700
>From: "slr" <>
>To:
>Subject: Re: insmod error
>Reply-To:
>
>you can try kernel.org
>
>slr
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "root" <>
>To: <>
>Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 12:56 PM
>Subject: Re: insmod error
>
>
>> In the documentation for the driver it says that it works for version
>> 2.4.3-12, "earlier or later versions may not be supported"
>>
>> should i try to find version 2.4.3-12.
>> Where should I go to download these kernel sources?
>> p.s. I'm a novice linux type, anything that's not "out of the box" I
>> don't really know too well.
>>
>> Thanx for your help.
>> Blake Barnett wrote:
>> >
>> > Try a newer kernel (I suggest at least 2.4.17) and/or search the
>> > linux-kernel mailing list archives. Also posting about the problem
>> > there (after you've searched! don't wanna get flamed! heh) might yield
>> > more results that here.
>> >
>> ________________________________________________
>> See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't
>post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>>
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>
>
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 5
>Subject: Re: insmod error
>From: Blake Barnett <>
>To:
>Date: 17 Jan 2002 14:15:23 -0700
>Reply-To:
>
>You can find the sources for kernel version 2.4.3 on kernel.org, but the
>"-12" package revision is specific to the distribution that is being
>mentioned in that documentation. If they mean 2.4.3 for RedHat you may
>find it on their ftp site. Or you may try rpmfind.net to find an older
>package.
>
>If you can provide more details on the failure (strace, etc.) and
>perhaps the rest of your configuration, I would still recommend posting
>this to the linux-kernel list. It is probably a known problem, in which
>case you'd get a quick response.
>
>
>
>On Thu, 2002-01-17 at 12:56, root wrote:
>> In the documentation for the driver it says that it works for version
>> 2.4.3-12, "earlier or later versions may not be supported"
>>
>> should i try to find version 2.4.3-12.
>> Where should I go to download these kernel sources?
>> p.s. I'm a novice linux type, anything that's not "out of the box" I
>> don't really know too well.
>>
>> Thanx for your help.
>> Blake Barnett wrote:
>> >
>> > Try a newer kernel (I suggest at least 2.4.17) and/or search the
>> > linux-kernel mailing list archives. Also posting about the problem
>> > there (after you've searched! don't wanna get flamed! heh) might yield
>> > more results that here.
>> >
>> ________________________________________________
>> See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>> 
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list  -  
>> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>-- 
>Blake Barnett (bdb)  <>
>Sr. Unix Administrator
>DevelopOnline.com                 office: 480-377-6816

>
>Learning is a skill, you get better at it with practice.
>
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 6
>Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 14:34:34 -0700
>From: root <>
>To:
>Subject: Re: insmod error
>Reply-To:
>
>I got the new kernel sources, but when i do:
>make menuconfig
>I go into scsi support, and into scs low level drivers, the qlogic
>"qla2x00 QLC driver support" is no longer an option.
>how do i fix that?
>
>slr wrote:
>>
>> you can try kernel.org
>>
>> slr
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "root" <>
>> To: <>
>> Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 12:56 PM
>> Subject: Re: insmod error
>>
>> > In the documentation for the driver it says that it works for version
>> > 2.4.3-12, "earlier or later versions may not be supported"
>> >
>> > should i try to find version 2.4.3-12.
>> > Where should I go to download these kernel sources?
>> > p.s. I'm a novice linux type, anything that's not "out of the box" I
>> > don't really know too well.
>> >
>> > Thanx for your help.
>> > Blake Barnett wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Try a newer kernel (I suggest at least 2.4.17) and/or search the
>> > > linux-kernel mailing list archives. Also posting about the problem
>> > > there (after you've searched! don't wanna get flamed! heh) might yield
>> > > more results that here.
>> > >
>> > ________________________________________________
>> > See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't
>> post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>> >
>> > PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>> > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>> >
>>
>> ________________________________________________
>> See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>>
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 7
>From: Jeffrey Pyne <>
>To: "''"
>     <>
>Subject: OpenBSD or Linux Firewall?
>Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 12:15:18 -0700
>Reply-To:

>
>I got Cox' conversion kit in the mail this weekend, so I guess I need to switch over to their new "hi-speed" service. While I'm switching, I thought I might as well upgrade my firewall. I'm currently using OpenBSD 2.6, and this baby has been running trouble-free for 2 1/2 years (not including a couple power outages). I've been thinking about switching to Linux, since iptables now offers "stateful" firewalling (the lack of that functionality in ipchains led me to go with OpenBSD way back when). My requirements are as follows:
>
>1) Must be able to handle DHCP since Cox.net apparently won't offer any static IP addresses (*sniff*)-- not just in terms of getting an IP address, but also in terms of the firewalling
>2) Must be able to establish a VPN tunnel to a Checkpoint firewall-- I know Linux can do it with FreeS/WAN, and a quick search of Google leads me to believe OpenBSD can handle it as well
>3) Must be able to "redirect" incoming traffic to other IP addresses/ports on the internal LAN- OpenBSD does that beautifully, and I imagine iptables does that now, too.
>4) Must be able to NAT the internal LAN for outbound traffic- should be a no-brainer for both Linux and OpenBSD
>5) Must be as rock-solid as my OpenBSD firewall has proven to be over the years
>
>So, would anyone care to offer their input about whether I should upgrade to OpenBSD 3.0 or move to a Linux platform? Any caveats, gotchas, or bugaboos? Any particular strengths or weaknesses RE: any of my requirements? Anyone ever set up a VPN tunnel to a Checkpoint firewall who would like to share any insight or experiences? Anybody else made the switch over to Cox.net and have anything to say (I noticed on there web page that their DHCP leases expire every 4 hours)? Any particularly good documentation that you might like to share? I am very intrigued by some of the floppy-based Linii, but I'm really interested more in whether the solution can handle the above requirements than how much space the installation requires.
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>~Jeff
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 8
>From: Tom Achtenberg <>
>To: "''"
>     <>
>Subject: RE: OpenBSD or Linux Firewall?
>Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 15:10:08 -0700
>Reply-To:

>
>I've been using Mitel's e-smith 5.0 for a couple of months now. Both on my old Qwest VDSL and now my slow dial-up (snif) It works great with DHCP from the outside and provides DHCP for the internal machines. I've been able to VPN through it to the firewall at work with no problem at all. When I recently ran some security tests on it based on a thread we had a week ago or so it passed with flying colors. I have 5 workstations (3 Win98, 1 Win 2K and 1 Linux RH7.2) and an NT 4.0 server all going through it with no slow down at all. It even has a built in email server if you want to have one.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jeffrey Pyne [mailto:jpyne@worldatwork.org]
>Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 12:15 PM
>To: ''
>Subject: OpenBSD or Linux Firewall?
>
>
>I got Cox' conversion kit in the mail this weekend, so I guess I need to switch over to their new "hi-speed" service. While I'm switching, I thought I might as well upgrade my firewall. I'm currently using OpenBSD 2.6, and this baby has been running trouble-free for 2 1/2 years (not including a couple power outages). I've been thinking about switching to Linux, since iptables now offers "stateful" firewalling (the lack of that functionality in ipchains led me to go with OpenBSD way back when). My requirements are as follows:
>
>1) Must be able to handle DHCP since Cox.net apparently won't offer any static IP addresses (*sniff*)-- not just in terms of getting an IP address, but also in terms of the firewalling
>2) Must be able to establish a VPN tunnel to a Checkpoint firewall-- I know Linux can do it with FreeS/WAN, and a quick search of Google leads me to believe OpenBSD can handle it as well
>3) Must be able to "redirect" incoming traffic to other IP addresses/ports on the internal LAN- OpenBSD does that beautifully, and I imagine iptables does that now, too.
>4) Must be able to NAT the internal LAN for outbound traffic- should be a no-brainer for both Linux and OpenBSD
>5) Must be as rock-solid as my OpenBSD firewall has proven to be over the years
>
>So, would anyone care to offer their input about whether I should upgrade to OpenBSD 3.0 or move to a Linux platform? Any caveats, gotchas, or bugaboos? Any particular strengths or weaknesses RE: any of my requirements? Anyone ever set up a VPN tunnel to a Checkpoint firewall who would like to share any insight or experiences? Anybody else made the switch over to Cox.net and have anything to say (I noticed on there web page that their DHCP leases expire every 4 hours)? Any particularly good documentation that you might like to share? I am very intrigued by some of the floppy-based Linii, but I'm really interested more in whether the solution can handle the above requirements than how much space the installation requires.
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>~Jeff
>________________________________________________
>See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>
>PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 9
>Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 13:10:53 -0800
>From: Chuck Collins <>
>Organization: http://studebakerparts.com/
>To:
>Subject: West side meeting
>Reply-To:
>
>Hi,
>Is there a PLUG meeting at GCC tonight, thursday?
>
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 10
>From: Tom Achtenberg <>
>To: "''"
>     <>
>Subject: RE: OpenBSD or Linux Firewall?
>Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 15:16:58 -0700
>Reply-To:

>
>I forgot to add it is based on a modified RH7.1 and their web saddress is www.e-smith.org
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Tom Achtenberg [mailto:Tom.Achtenberg@fh.org]
>Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 3:10 PM
>To: ''
>Subject: RE: OpenBSD or Linux Firewall?
>
>
>I've been using Mitel's e-smith 5.0 for a couple of months now. Both on my old Qwest VDSL and now my slow dial-up (snif) It works great with DHCP from the outside and provides DHCP for the internal machines. I've been able to VPN through it to the firewall at work with no problem at all. When I recently ran some security tests on it based on a thread we had a week ago or so it passed with flying colors. I have 5 workstations (3 Win98, 1 Win 2K and 1 Linux RH7.2) and an NT 4.0 server all going through it with no slow down at all. It even has a built in email server if you want to have one.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jeffrey Pyne [mailto:jpyne@worldatwork.org]
>Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 12:15 PM
>To: ''
>Subject: OpenBSD or Linux Firewall?
>
>
>I got Cox' conversion kit in the mail this weekend, so I guess I need to switch over to their new "hi-speed" service. While I'm switching, I thought I might as well upgrade my firewall. I'm currently using OpenBSD 2.6, and this baby has been running trouble-free for 2 1/2 years (not including a couple power outages). I've been thinking about switching to Linux, since iptables now offers "stateful" firewalling (the lack of that functionality in ipchains led me to go with OpenBSD way back when). My requirements are as follows:
>
>1) Must be able to handle DHCP since Cox.net apparently won't offer any static IP addresses (*sniff*)-- not just in terms of getting an IP address, but also in terms of the firewalling
>2) Must be able to establish a VPN tunnel to a Checkpoint firewall-- I know Linux can do it with FreeS/WAN, and a quick search of Google leads me to believe OpenBSD can handle it as well
>3) Must be able to "redirect" incoming traffic to other IP addresses/ports on the internal LAN- OpenBSD does that beautifully, and I imagine iptables does that now, too.
>4) Must be able to NAT the internal LAN for outbound traffic- should be a no-brainer for both Linux and OpenBSD
>5) Must be as rock-solid as my OpenBSD firewall has proven to be over the years
>
>So, would anyone care to offer their input about whether I should upgrade to OpenBSD 3.0 or move to a Linux platform? Any caveats, gotchas, or bugaboos? Any particular strengths or weaknesses RE: any of my requirements? Anyone ever set up a VPN tunnel to a Checkpoint firewall who would like to share any insight or experiences? Anybody else made the switch over to Cox.net and have anything to say (I noticed on there web page that their DHCP leases expire every 4 hours)? Any particularly good documentation that you might like to share? I am very intrigued by some of the floppy-based Linii, but I'm really interested more in whether the solution can handle the above requirements than how much space the installation requires.
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>~Jeff
>________________________________________________
>See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>
>PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>________________________________________________
>See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>
>PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>
>--__--__--
>
>_______________________________________________
>PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>
>End of PLUG-discuss Digest
>


________________________________________________
See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.

PLUG-discuss mailing list -
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

This message was posted to the following mailing lists:
Plug Discuss
Mailing List Info | Nearby Messages		<-Evolution on RedHat 7.2Evolution on RedHat 7.2->
Some Mailing List Archive administrated by UnconfiguredLurker (version 2.3)