Tim wrote:
> Realising you don't really want two configurations to have to do, but
> if it's your intention that *some* things should use 127.0.0.1, and
> other things should not, then I think you're stuck having to *manage*
> that.
I'm on the trail of a possible solution. Further ideas welcome.
On 6 October 2014 22:29:56 GMT+01:00, CLOSE Dave
wrote:
>I wrote:
>
>> We have a number of internal machines which run a local nameserver.
>> It's primarily a relay for the wider net but does a few other things
>> as well. So DHCP is configured to specify 127.0.0.1 as the nameserver
>> address fo
Allegedly, on or about 06 October 2014, CLOSE Dave sent:
> The difficulty is that, during kickstart the DHCP configuration is
> wrong. I'd much rather not have to use a different configuration for
> kickstart than for normal operation. While I can do that for an
> initial installation, it is far tr
I wrote:
> We have a number of internal machines which run a local nameserver.
> It's primarily a relay for the wider net but does a few other things
> as well. So DHCP is configured to specify 127.0.0.1 as the nameserver
> address for these machines.
>
> Of course, that is also what kickstart is
Allegedly, on or about 03 October 2014, CLOSE Dave sent:
> We have a number of internal machines which run a local nameserver. It's
> primarily a relay for the wider net but does a few other things as well.
> So DHCP is configured to specify 127.0.0.1 as the nameserver address for
> these machin
On 6 July 2011 15:24, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-07-05 at 23:32 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
>> On 07/05/2011 11:23 PM, 夜神 岩男 wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > The footprint of a user by Google's way of doing things is quite a bit
>> > larger than cookies or IP tracking. They do not rely on any
On Tue, 2011-07-05 at 23:32 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 07/05/2011 11:23 PM, 夜神 岩男 wrote:
>
> >
> > The footprint of a user by Google's way of doing things is quite a bit
> > larger than cookies or IP tracking. They do not rely on any one set of
>
> >
>
> This conspiracy opinion stuff
On Tue, 2011-07-05 at 22:55 -0400, Tom H wrote:
> So, until there's an official complaint of some sort in this regard,
> you're just spreading FUD - unless you have a relevant URL to a valid
> news report.
i.e. Do not query that something may be happening, until someone else
says so...
--
[tim@l
On 07/05/2011 11:23 PM, 夜神 岩男 wrote:
>
> The footprint of a user by Google's way of doing things is quite a bit
> larger than cookies or IP tracking. They do not rely on any one set of
>
This conspiracy opinion stuff has nothing to do with fedora - please
take this discussion out of the mail
On Tue, 2011-07-05 at 13:28 -0700, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 07/05/2011 11:31 AM, 夜神 岩男 wrote:
> > DNS query history would be the single most potent addition to Google's
> > profiling tags (as in naked profiling, on subjects who are not logged in
> > to a Google service or accepting tracking cookies or
2011/7/5 夜神 岩男 :
>
>> >> yeah... I just can't be bothered to set up BIND. That's what things like
>> >> Google Public DNS is for. :D
>> >
>> > No, the purpose of Google Public DNS is to give Google insight into
>> > every network query you make. Your filterbubble is heavily influenced by
>> > your
夜神 岩男:
>> DNS query history would be the single most potent addition to Google's
>> profiling tags (as in naked profiling, on subjects who are not logged in
>> to a Google service or accepting tracking cookies or other devices).
Joe Zeff:
> How do they keep track of people like me who have dynamic
On 07/05/2011 11:31 AM, 夜神 岩男 wrote:
> DNS query history would be the single most potent addition to Google's
> profiling tags (as in naked profiling, on subjects who are not logged in
> to a Google service or accepting tracking cookies or other devices).
How do they keep track of people like me w
On Wed, 2011-07-06 at 03:31 +0900, 夜神 岩男 wrote:
> The filter bubble issue is very real. If you and I do a search on
> Google for any given string, logged in to a Google account of any sort
> or not, we will receive different results. This is a fact.
Something they can do perfectly easily with cook
Joe Zeff zeff.us> writes:
>
> On 07/05/2011 07:40 AM, JB wrote:
> > Not only that !
> > She claimed to have smoked but not inhaled too ...
>
> Obviously you've never smoked either a pipe or a cigar. The only form
> of tobacco you inhale is a cigarette.
>
> Oh, wait, you probably weren't tal
On 07/05/2011 07:40 AM, JB wrote:
> Not only that !
> She claimed to have smoked but not inhaled too ... :-)
Obviously you've never smoked either a pipe or a cigar. The only form
of tobacco you inhale is a cigarette.
Oh, wait, you probably weren't talking about tobacco, were you? Never mind!
-
> >> yeah... I just can't be bothered to set up BIND. That's what things like
> >> Google Public DNS is for. :D
> >
> > No, the purpose of Google Public DNS is to give Google insight into
> > every network query you make. Your filterbubble is heavily influenced by
> > your history record in Google
On Tue, 05 Jul 2011 20:45:13 +0900
夜神 岩男 wrote:
...
> Your filterbubble is heavily influenced
> by your history record in Google's DNS system if you have dodged the
> other ways of tracking.
>
> http://dontbubble.us/
...
ixquick ( https://www.ixquick.com/ ) is another privacy search option.
It
Am 05.07.2011 17:17, schrieb John Aldrich:
> On Tue July 5 2011, 夜神 岩男 wrote:
>>
>> No, the purpose of Google Public DNS is to give Google insight into
>> every network query you make. Your filterbubble is heavily influenced by
>> your history record in Google's DNS system if you have dodged the
On Tue July 5 2011, 夜神 岩男 wrote:
> No, the purpose of Google Public DNS is to give Google insight into
> every network query you make. Your filterbubble is heavily influenced by
> your history record in Google's DNS system if you have dodged the other
> ways of tracking. This sort of profiling goe
On Tue July 5 2011, 夜神 岩男 wrote:
>
> No, the purpose of Google Public DNS is to give Google insight into
> every network query you make. Your filterbubble is heavily influenced by
> your history record in Google's DNS system if you have dodged the other
> ways of tracking. This sort of profiling g
Tim yahoo.com.au> writes:
> ...
> Want an example? There's the president who "did not have sex with that
> woman." Well, he apparently did have some sexually intimate relations,
> just not conjoined genitals. So the denial is correct, but incorrect.
> ...
Not only that !
She claimed to have
On Tue, 2011-07-05 at 08:16 -0400, Tom H wrote:
> Do you have any proof that Google's using queries to its Public DNS
> service to profile anyone (in spite of its FAQ clarifying that it
> isn't)?
I'd certainly have my doubts. I tend to have little faith in the public
declarations of what corporat
Tim:
>> I run my own DNS server, for a similar reason: Every ISP I've tried
>> has a crappy DNS server. Before I did that, I had to put some
>> domain's IP into my hosts file, because their DNS server usually gave
>> no answer.
John Aldrich:
> yeah... I just can't be bothered to set up BIND. Tha
On 07/05/2011 08:16 AM, Tom H wrote:
>>
>> http://dontbubble.us/
>>
>> Avoiding Google entirely has brought a great deal of standardization and
>> rationality back to my organization -- that we didn't realize was
>> beginning to get shaky until just recently. Such an insidious thing,
>> filtered a
2011/7/5 夜神 岩男 :
> On Tue, 2011-07-05 at 06:34 -0400, John Aldrich wrote:
>> On Tue July 5 2011, Tim wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 12:52 -0400, John Aldrich wrote:
>> > > might I suggest trying Google Public DNS servers? 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.8.4
>> > > are the IP addresses. My ISP apparently runs so
On Tue, 2011-07-05 at 06:34 -0400, John Aldrich wrote:
> On Tue July 5 2011, Tim wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 12:52 -0400, John Aldrich wrote:
> > > might I suggest trying Google Public DNS servers? 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.8.4
> > > are the IP addresses. My ISP apparently runs some sort of filtering
>
> I finish my mail : i just try 3 times to send the mail because
> thunderbid failed to send it due to configuration problem on the server
> smtp.googlemail.com I open a CLI and run ping smtp.googlemail.com the
> server answer fine and i achieve to send my email.
> ??
> Eric
Perhaps a bogus DNS
On Tue July 5 2011, Tim wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 12:52 -0400, John Aldrich wrote:
> > might I suggest trying Google Public DNS servers? 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.8.4
> > are the IP addresses. My ISP apparently runs some sort of filtering
> > and occasionally I have problems with their DNS, so I switche
On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 12:52 -0400, John Aldrich wrote:
> might I suggest trying Google Public DNS servers? 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.8.4
> are the IP addresses. My ISP apparently runs some sort of filtering
> and occasionally I have problems with their DNS, so I switched to
> Google and that pretty much reso
On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 18:56 +0200, Eric Tanguy wrote:
> > nameserver 1.2 3.4
> >
> > then try:
> >
> > $ dig @1.2.3.4 mit.edu
> >
> > Do the same on your other machines. Are they all using the same
> > nameserver?
> >
> > poc
> >
> Yes i mean my router's ip.
>
> $ cat /etc/resolv.conf
> # Generate
On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 06:59:34PM +0200, Eric Tanguy wrote:
> Le 04/07/2011 18:56, Eric Tanguy a écrit :
> > Le 04/07/2011 16:29, Patrick O'Callaghan a écrit :
> >> On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 16:26 +0200, Eric Tanguy wrote:
> >>> Since few days now i have a name resolution problem. For example when i
>
Le 04/07/2011 18:56, Eric Tanguy a écrit :
> Le 04/07/2011 16:29, Patrick O'Callaghan a écrit :
>> On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 16:26 +0200, Eric Tanguy wrote:
>>> Since few days now i have a name resolution problem. For example when i
>>> entrer a new address in firefox it returns that the name can't be
Le 04/07/2011 16:29, Patrick O'Callaghan a écrit :
> On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 16:26 +0200, Eric Tanguy wrote:
>> Since few days now i have a name resolution problem. For example when i
>> entrer a new address in firefox it returns that the name can't be
>> resolved. Reloading the page and firefox disp
On Mon July 4 2011, Eric Tanguy wrote:
> Since few days now i have a name resolution problem. For example when i
> entrer a new address in firefox it returns that the name can't be
> resolved. Reloading the page and firefox display fine the page. I have
> the same problem from thunderbird or cli us
Regards, Eric
Are you using a proxy for Internet connection? Because, this kind of
issues I've seen on it.
1- I think that you have to check your /etc/resolv.conf which are the
entries that you have there.
2- The second advice that I give you is to analyze your network
connection (rates, bandw
On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 16:26 +0200, Eric Tanguy wrote:
> Since few days now i have a name resolution problem. For example when i
> entrer a new address in firefox it returns that the name can't be
> resolved. Reloading the page and firefox display fine the page. I have
> the same problem from thu
37 matches
Mail list logo
