| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Comments:
<0> well delete the soundcard from devices
<0> and hit refresh
<1> ok
<2> sorry was adding secfoc's rss feeds
<3> is it safe to say that rootkits are a lot more lethal and stealthy than a typic. virus? considering a scanner will most likely always detect a known virus anyway, but rootkits are quite difficult to detect and stop
<2> reyeZZo: yeah that'd be a fair statement
<3> hmph
<2> hehe gotta love dilbert :)
<3> ok back to business. i'm gettin lazy here hehe
<0> there is only one tool i know of that can even detect rootkits
<3> actively detects?
<3> or post
<0> post
<3> yeah i've used a couple of those programs, problem i found was that each tended to yield its own results.. differently
<0> sysinternals is the only one i trust
<2> yeah i've come to love sysinternals
<2> The loan of an illicitly obtained pre-release copy of Revenge of the Sith has left seven friends each facing up to a year in jail and a fine of up to $100,000 (000). Albert Valente, 28, took a copy of the final Star Wars film from the Los Angeles post-production facility where he worked last May, a week before its theatrical release
<2> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/27/cingular_emoticon_patent/
<2> Cingular applies to patent smileys :@
<1> ok it happened right after this:- Faulting application svchost.exe, version 5.1.2600.2180, faulting module ntdll.dll, version 5.1.2600.2180, fault address 0x00018fea.
<4> mmm. has someone worked with MS Small Business Server 2003 edition?
<2> ask a question rather than guru hunting
<4> is it worth upgrading to Server 2003 standart for a smal loffice (up to 10 clients)
<2> not unless you need the specific functionality of standard
<0> sbs has a 75 user limit
<4> I know what Server 2003 stabdart can do, but never worked with small business edition servers
<2> small biz server is usually picture perfect for a office that small
<2> Gimp-Cow: yeah 75 concurrent
<4> which is more then enough for them
<4> gracias
<2> welcome
<2> de nada
<2> man i swear it's like i can never catch up on my friggin email. catch up, 5 minutes later there's twice as many
<3> hmm i wonder if i can get documentation on my bios, more specifically a setup and page schematic layout ;)
<2> ok, screw this, I'm wiping off 2k3 web edition and installing 2k3 standard then upgrading it to R2
<3> so i can start blinding this out
<2> web is just pissing me off. can't do **** with it
<0> you can't even run sql on web edition
<2> you can run express or the 2000 dev but not the full release of sql
<0> yeah
<0> which is gay because sql costs more then windows anyways
<2> i want active directory and windows domain stuff
<2> i didn't know web wouldn't do any of that when i got the copy from my friend's action pack
<0> hah
<2> he gave me one of his serials from the pack :/
<0> action pack rules
<5> you shouldnt run sql on web edition
<5> it's good that it explicitly denies it
<2> this upgrade is probably going to be illegal. i'm hoping to be able to buy my OWN action pack in a couple months.
<0> digi it doesn't deny it for performance reasons
<0> or security
<5> it denies it for business rule reason
<0> *shrug*
<2> digi is right
<2> usually sql SHOULD be on it's own dedicated machine
<2> even if it does autotune
<5> the ***umption is if you were using web eddition, you probably have a fairly heavy webserver
<0> he's right, but the only reason they do it is so you have to buy SBS
<5> huh?
<0> a lot of people that have "web edition"
<2> digiwork: yeah, i wasn't familiar with windows server editions when i got it from him
<0> just use it as a server os
<2> i'm a unix guy. i'm just now moving into the MS arena
<0> stupid people, yes
<5> right, there are a lot of companies who have pirated versions of XP too
<0> but they do exist
<0> if i was microsoft i'd do the same thing
<5> but the intention of web edition is so that large companies who ahve major web server farms dont have to pay full price for a "web server"
<0> but it still pisses me off :P
<2> digi right
<0> yeah
<2> web is perfect for web clusters
<2> just not good for my own needs
<0> /out
<5> and you wouldn't run sql server on a wb server inside of a web farm
<5> im bored
<2> digi right :)
<2> i am too, which is why i'm considering doing this changeout
<2> give me something worthwhile to do
<2> i need to read up on the intricates for standard and enterprise.
<6> I mean, I could probably do Web edition -- the servers themselves are going to be running nothing but Ruby on Rails and the SCGI service.
<6> The web servers and database servers are going to be running Linux.
<2> mmm ROR
<2> fdiv_bug: why not freebsd and get the performance boost, as well as better audited codebase?
<2> just interested in your decision choice, not trying to pick an OS fight so you know
<6> Because FreeBSD is significantly less manageable for wide-scale deployments.
<6> I expect that, once fully scaled out, we'll have at least six datacenters with at least four to six Linux boxes per site.
<6> I don't want to be running make installkernel on each of those ****ers.
<2> how so with an nfs exported /usr/obj or even /usr/src? or a samba3'd export to the web cluster?
<6> Why should I be exporting a file system to manage updates?
<6> When I can push any local packages I need to a yum repository and wait `til 4AM.
<2> i'm just speaking of the base system
<6> A big part of it boils down to skill -- I've got much, much, much more skill with managing wide-scale "Red Hat" Linux deployments.
<2> fdiv_bug: well you would also cut down on the number of updates you need to get. when was the last time you saw a freebsd core vuln? ports yes, core base, no.
<2> ahh ok
<6> Deryl: FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE has 6 current vulnerabilities in core.
<2> like i said, i was just interested.
<0> heh
<0> owned.
<6> Known vulnerabilities, at least.
<6> And each one requires a patch and rebuild of something.
<6> Three of them -- I think, maybe four -- were kernel issues, so that's only one rebuild.
<6> But I'd rather not be running custom kernels. That's something else I like about Linux versus FreeBSD.
<6> I'd rather be running the kernel that I can reasonably trust p***ed Red Hat's testing process.
<2> hehe redhat kernels ARE custom kernels
<2> they're not vanilla
<6> You think I'm not aware of that?
<6> But they're not custom to Red Hat.
<2> unless you're creating vanilla kernel rpms
<2> uhh many of their patches are custom to redhat
<6> Maybe I'm not explaining it clearly.
<2> dude i used to work for them. a great deal of the scsi patchsets are specific to redhat
<6> Oracle tests with the kernels Red Hat releases. So does SAP. So does SISS.
<6> You're playing that card again?
<2> ahh yeah. those are planned out testings.
<6> I also used to work for Red Hat. We've had this conversation.
<2> what card is there to play?
<6> The "I used to work for Red Hat" card.
<2> uhh yeah, and you worked there too, so to say that the rh kernels aren't custom to redhat is whre i give you a really quizical look
<6> The fact of the matter is, Red Hat builds their kernels and tests the **** out of them. Probably somewhere, someone built the same FreeBSD kernel configuration I'm using and tested it, but I don't think they put any seal of approval.
<6> They are stock to Red Hat Linux.
<6> That is what Red Hat Linux is built upon and tested with.
<7> I just set up remote desktop on a win2k server machine, but it wont let me have a higher bit depth than 256 colors...what/s wrong?
<6> Therefore, for Red Hat Linux they are not custom kernels.
<6> If I rebuilt my own kernel and had problems, and called Red Hat they'd tell me to try it with their kernel packages (unless I was paying them for a TAO or whatever they're called now).
<6> With FreeBSD, unless I rebuild GENERIC for kernel patches, every kernel is a custom kernel.
<7> well it's now up to the vendors to do the final patching and bugfixing of the linux kernel
<7> that makes things even better!
<6> H2SO4: It's possible that the config on the server is set to restrict that.
<2> fdiv_bug: ok, i'm listening. just not saying anything.
<7> fdiv_bug: i've looked at the conf and i see how to override stuff, but not bit depth
<6> H2SO4: I thought there was an option for that in whatever Terminal Services config widget Win2K Server has.
<7> im in terminal services configuration
<6> I'm pretty sure there is in 2K3, at least...
<7> i see connections and server settings...
<8> the Quran - Jesus Return to Earth - 14,086 KByte - http://www.harunyahya.com/download/download.php?id=18387
<6> H2SO4: I don't have a Win2K Server here or else I'd check.
<9> hang on let me check something
<9> you have admin access?
<9> for the server?
<7> you're talking to me? yes
<9> k yeah sorry im multitasking and i saw your question hehe
<9> im looking right now 1 sec
<6> Heh. http://www.electric-manga.com/Error/4041.html
<2> hahaha
<10> How do you boot windows from the windows xp installation cd instead of having it attempt to install windows?
<7> you dont
<11> inet6 addr: fe80::240:caff:fe72:6c5d/64 Scope:Link
<9> strainer dos it ask boot from cd?
<7> i think he's trying to get to the point that he wants something like knoppix
Return to
#windows
or
Go to some related
logs:
#politics
#red
asp mysql_insert_id()
nec 1940 cx flicker
#politics
#netbsd
override read only file system SUSE
#gamedev
#computers
#politics
|
|