Vielen Dank für Ihre Anfrage. Ihr Email wird schnellstmöglich beantwortet.
Ihr Chicco Team
On Feb 23, 2006, at 4:22 PM, Edward Faulkner wrote:
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 11:13:35AM +1100, Geoff Crompton wrote:
When you say "The server runs a tracker", are you explaining
bittorrent,
or do the security.debian.org servers actually run a tracker at
the moment?
I was just explaining bi
so what's this all about? get back to me with a
list of what's worth what.
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 11:13:35AM +1100, Geoff Crompton wrote:
> When you say "The server runs a tracker", are you explaining bittorrent,
> or do the security.debian.org servers actually run a tracker at the moment?
I was just explaining bittorrent. Sorry for the confusion.
> How well does bitt
Edward Faulkner wrote:
> Or you could just use bittorrent. The server runs a tracker and
> everyone cooperatively downloads chunks. Same kind of idea, but it
> doesn't require multicast support (which may or may not exist in
> various networks).
When you say "The server runs a tracker", are you
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 04:40:38PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Instead of having all users connect and DL their own copies of
> security updates (which requires tremendous bandwidth), would it be
> possible to use multicast to 'broadcast' the updates. The thought is
> that updates could be di
Interesting, indeed. Looks like multicast is available on some networks:
http://www.multicasttech.com/status/mbgp.sum
But the best place to ask this type of question might be the
debian-admin or debian-mirrors mailing list.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Has this concept been considered?
>
>Instead
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, Neal Murphy wrote:
> On Thursday 23 February 2006 17:05, Michael Loftis wrote:
> > Good idea except this requires large scale rollout of mutlicast, which
> > AFAIK, hasn't happened.
>
> I thought it had progressed further than being a curiosity. Is its current
> scale enough
On Thursday 23 February 2006 17:05, Michael Loftis wrote:
> Good idea except this requires large scale rollout of mutlicast, which
> AFAIK, hasn't happened.
I thought it had progressed further than being a curiosity. Is its current
scale enough to make a difference?
N
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
Good idea except this requires large scale rollout of mutlicast, which
AFAIK, hasn't happened.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Has this concept been considered?
Instead of having all users connect and DL their own copies of security updates
(which requires tremendous bandwidth), would it be possible to use multicast to
'broadcast' the updates. The thought is that updates could be distributed
without saturating the serv
Quoting Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> You are confusing worms, Blaster exploited the DCOM RPC vulnerability
> (CAN-2003-0352). The one that exploited CAN-2002-0649 and
> CAN-2002-1145 in both SQL Server and MSDE was SQLExp / Slammer.
True. Thank you, and apologies for my
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 12:47:44PM +0100, aliban wrote:
> >
> I am sorry, but I am quite new linux and debian at all and you may excuse
> my question:
>
> why is there no rule to "prompt the user" for all applications that open
> ports on non-localhost?
The default policy is a compromise between
Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña schrieb:
>If I were you (aliban) I would bug rhythmbox. It seems that Bug #349478 got
>it to reduce the Depends: on that daemon to a Recommends:, I think it would
>be better to have that as Suggests:
>Disclaimer: I don't know much about rhythmbox and the relationship
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 12:04:50PM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
The former worm targeted a critical OS service, the later a database service.
Neither of which were actually useful if bound to loopback, BTW.
Actually, they were. A lot of the embedded DB servers were only used by
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 08:59:40AM -0800, Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting aliban ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> > MS Blaster infected many million system within seconds...
>
> Relying on the vulnerable MSDE embedded SQL database engine being
> embedded into a large number of consumer software products, and
17 matches
Mail list logo
