Does kernel 2.6 include an NSA backdoor?

Bill Baka <bbaka@comcast.net> writes:

> Sebastian G. wrote:
>> Bill Baka wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I was talking about my Ethernet light to my computer where the
>>> server NIC should block even more junk. If my Ethernet light is
>>> busy that probably means someone is trying to hack me or maybe just
>>> anybody on the system that responds. It doesn't get into my
>>> computer, AFAIK.
>>
>>
>> Maybe you're just too stupid to understand ARP and PPPoE?
>
> Stupid does not apply here.
> Lack of motivation does apply.
> I am now past 30 years of computer use.
> In 1978 I took home a 300 baud acoustic terminal and dialed into the
> mainframe at work to play Star Trek against the computer.
> Bill Baka

Yes. very good. But how thats supposed to help you understand modern HW
and networking protocols is anybodies guess. My grandad had gas lighting
- but he can't wire a plug.

AZ Nomad <aznomad.2@PremoveOBthisOX.COM> writes:

> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 16:19:16 -0800 (PST), plenty900@yahoo.com <plenty900@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>I've learned that there are bits of NSA's SELinux in various
>>places in kernel 2.6. How can I be sure that Big Brother isn't
>>using back doors or bugs to break into my computer?
>>Especially with all the illegal spying done these days...
>>How much safer would it be to just switch back to 2.4 or 2.5?
>
> Read the fucking source code! Thousands of others have and there
> are no backdoors. When you build a kernel, it is from the source
> code and if the source code has no backdoors, then the compiled
> kernel won't either.

Assuming you read the code to each and every application which runs
under root. Assuming you have read the code for the compiler.

COLA seems to hold some of the brightest C gurus in the whole world!

Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 13:20:07 -0800, Bill Baka wrote:
>
>> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>> On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 17:39:47 GMT, Bill Baka wrote:
>>>
>>>> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 15:54:19 GMT, Bill Baka wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> plenty900@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> It might be more complicated than this. They are said to have back doors in
>>>>>>>> *standard protocols* (Linux included) [1,2,3,4] and these are hard to get by
>>>>>>>> unless you are a security professional (I'm not). What about hardware-based
>>>>>>>> hacks [5] (in which case "Intel" might be just an abbreviation)? Remember that
>>>>>>>> they just need to sniff packets and then decrypt successfully in order to gain
>>>>>>>> remote access.
>>>>>>> Finally a mature response. I was beginning to think I was dealing with
>>>>>>> 11-year-olds.
>>>>>> If you don't think the NSA (or anybody else) gets into your computer,
>>>>>> how about this, my experience so far. I used a torrent engine to
>>>>>> download 'Dreamgirls' for my daughter. What I got was a crappy copy and
>>>>>> a nasty e-mail from the MPAA police.
>>>>> Maybe you should have considered paying for it?
>>>> Idiot. Then I would have bought a junk movie.
>>> Why not just steal like you did the Dreamgirls movie?
>> I thought it stunk, and I don't steal movies. All I have to do is wait
>> 3-6 months and they are either on television or DVD rentals.
>
> So why did you download an illegal copy?
> You don't think that is stealing?
>
> Hint: It doesn't matter if the movie stinks.

Damn, you are an anal asshole.
>
>>> A great example you set for your daughter.
>> I download Doctor Who and Torchwood from BBC. Doctor Who is on Sci-Fi
>> but Torchwood is on a digital channel I can't get.
>> I spent over $3,000 a few years back buying 3 sets of 27" NTSC
>> televisions, VCR's, and DVD players (NTSC only), so I am not hurrying to
>> buy 3 HDTV setups or converters.
>
> Why?

3 real HDTVs (1920 x 1080P) would be about $6,000, for starters.
Most of the wide screen sets at China-mart are not true HDTVs.
They do have some wide screens that are only 780P or 1080I and will most
likely be obsolete themselves if the FCC enforces the true 1080P.
Considering the past, I doubt if the FCC will do the right thing.
In addition I don't like spending that much anywhere since I know I will
be supporting 'COMMUNIST' China.
Add to that the fact that I have about $2,000 of VHS movies and about a
thousand in DVDs that would be rendered useless along with my VCRs and
DVD players and it gets to be more $$$ than I want to spend on sitting
on my butt mode.
>
>
>>>>>> About 30 years ago I got a visit from 2 FBI gorillas in $1,000 suits
>>>>>> knocking on my door (at home, 8:00 P.M.) for a very minor infraction of
>>>>>> FCC regulations, and they gave me a pink ticket and a warning that if I
>>>>>> dot another warning it would be a RED ticket. The RED ticket is one step
>>>>>> from having you license pulled for a year.
>>>>> FBI agents don't make enough money to afford $1,000 suits.
>>>>> Perhaps you meant $100.00 suits?
>>>> More like $1,000 suits when they go calling on people.
>>> Not quite.
>>> Most of the people they are calling on wouldn't know the difference between
>>> a $1000.00 suit and a $100.00 suit.
>> I would. I deal with suit crowd more than I like. Sweats are fine for me
>> to work in at home.
>
> Maybe they heard you were a suit man and up dressed for the occasion.
> Stuff like that gets around you know.

Go ahead and make stuff up.
>
>
>>> Especially someone with violations like you evidently had.
>>> IOW you are a very small fish.
>> I'm such small fish I am wondering why they bothered at all.
>
> Maybe there is more to the story?

I was on their hit list for too many speeding tickets?
>
>
>>>>> Sounds like you are an Amateur Radio operator who was violating FCC
>>>>> regulations.
>>>>> Maybe more than 100 percent modulation or something like that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rex Ballard is this you?
>>>>> Rex is a HAM as well.
>>>> And you are an idiot. I am not a HAM operator and never have been.
>>>> The license was for a first class radiotelephone engineer with shipboard
>>>> radar endorsement. That was required for me to work on transmitters.
>>> Even worse.
>>> As a professional you should know better.
>> My boss asked (err, told) me to install that setup since the guy was a
>> major customer. He owned 12 charter boats and bought all his electronics
>> at the place I worked. Since he assured the boss that he would only be
>> monitoring his charter boats for an emergency, it was a go. The customer
>> was yakking all over Silicon Valley like a kid with a cell phone and
>> when he got nailed by the FCC he lied and told them we said it was OK.
>
> Of course you had a rider to your contract which stipulated the above?
> I know you'll answer yes, but I doubt you did.

I wanted to, but the boss didn't. He didn't want to piss off one of his
big money customers. I did my job like he wanted and got nailed.
>
>
>>>
>>>>>> If you don't think the FBI monitors your activities just write something
>>>>>> that says "A$$a$$inate p-r-e-s-i-d-e-n-t 'WEED'" in it and wait for the
>>>>>> FBI at your door.
>>>>>> I'm not paranoid, I have been hassled over trivial stuff.
>>>>>> A few years back, like 2004 (I think) I was detained by both DHS and FBI
>>>>>> agents on duty at Beale A.F.B. for riding my bike on a PUBLIC road and
>>>>>> taking a few pictures with me 1.2 M Pixel fixed focus el-cheapo camera.
>>>>> I guess you were too young to read the signs that are invariably around
>>>>> places like AFB, Nuke facilities and more recently since 9-11 bridges,
>>>>> tunnels, skyscrapers etc that say "Photography Prohibited".
>>>> 59 is too young? I have time to read ALL signs at bicycle speed and
>>>> there were none since I was at a back entrance and they only keep
>>>> private planes and a few A-10 Warthogs and some KC-135's.
>>> Some people never learn to read.
>>> You might be one of them.
>> 600+ words per minute, a little slower upside down or in a mirror.
>> My dad was a printer/proofreader so he brought home things like the
>> print plates after an overnight printing run.
>
> That sounds pretty cool!
> My dad was a pilot for a major airline.
> He didn't bring planes home but we got to fly anywhere for free+sales tax.

Uh huh, sure. I just got a free Chicago Tribune every day and some of
the Zinc plates that made it.
>
>
>>> So you didn't read the signs.
>>> That's your problem.
>> IDIOT.
>> There are no signs, except on the fence that says "Do not trespass".
>> That means if you climb the fence you can be shot.
>
> No it means, get out of there fast!
> Especially in today's hyper sensitive LE environment...
>
> IOW use some common sense.

The MPs at the main gate said that due to the current situation they had
authority to shoot anyone that should not be on the base, and they
seemed to want a chance.
>
>> That means the highway is a public road and not under their jurisdiction.
>> Again....IDIOT.
>
> Let's see:
> You steal movies for your kid and get caught.

2007.

> You do a job for an idiot and he gets you in trouble.

1972, and it's called 'Keeping your job'!!!

> You get harassed for hanging out, with a camera BTW, where you just maybe
> should not be.

2005, and I had every right to be there with a camera. The top secret
part of the base is way beyond camera range.
>
> And you're calling *ME* an idiot?
>
> That's a good one!

The comment stands. I never went to jail or got anything harsher than an
FBI warning.
>
>
>>> Do you also complain to the highway patrol that because the 55 mph speed
>>> limit signs go by so fast you can't read them and that's why you were going
>>> 90 mph?
>> On a bicycle? I wish! I haven't driven a car for 1.5 years, by choice.
>> Gas prices = bad.
>> Exercise = good.
>
> True..
> Better learn to pedal faster though if you are going to frequent places
> where you might get shot at.
>
> I can hear it now:
>
> " Gee Sargent, all I wanted to do was take a picture of that funny looking
> aircraft over there so I could use it for a background on my Linux
> machine's screen saver."

Like I said, it was not the top security area and I did not hop the
fence to get shot at. It's Bush and his idiotic paranoia.
>
>
>
>
>> Again, IDIOT!
>
> See above.
>
> I'd learn to pedal faster and leave the camera home.

Why. I like to document the places I ride to with pictures.
>
>> Beale AFB is over 10 square miles, maybe a lot more and they are
>> directly in the way of the mountains I like to ride in.
>> All the roads to get around are bordered by their fence, with signs.
>> Too far OT, and this damn thing is cross-posted.
>> Bill Baka
>
> So?
> You can drive over the Verrazano Bridge for $10.00 all day long.
> Stop and take a picture and you very well might find yourself in jail.

In a car and blocking traffic, duh!
>
> And oh yea, the sign is the size of a postage stamp, well not really, but
> very small.

At car speeds. At bicycle speeds they are all readable.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verrazano-Narrows_Bridge
>
>
I believe you.
Bill Baka

Bill Baka <bbaka@comcast.net> writes:

> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>> On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 13:20:07 -0800, Bill Baka wrote:
>>
>>> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 17:39:47 GMT, Bill Baka wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 15:54:19 GMT, Bill Baka wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> plenty900@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> It might be more complicated than this. They are said to have back doors in
>>>>>>>>> *standard protocols* (Linux included) [1,2,3,4] and these are hard to get by
>>>>>>>>> unless you are a security professional (I'm not). What about hardware-based
>>>>>>>>> hacks [5] (in which case "Intel" might be just an abbreviation)? Remember that
>>>>>>>>> they just need to sniff packets and then decrypt successfully in order to gain
>>>>>>>>> remote access.
>>>>>>>> Finally a mature response. I was beginning to think I was dealing with
>>>>>>>> 11-year-olds.
>>>>>>> If you don't think the NSA (or anybody else) gets into your
>>>>>>> computer, how about this, my experience so far. I used a
>>>>>>> torrent engine to download 'Dreamgirls' for my daughter. What I
>>>>>>> got was a crappy copy and a nasty e-mail from the MPAA police.
>>>>>> Maybe you should have considered paying for it?
>>>>> Idiot. Then I would have bought a junk movie.
>>>> Why not just steal like you did the Dreamgirls movie?
>>> I thought it stunk, and I don't steal movies. All I have to do is
>>> wait 3-6 months and they are either on television or DVD rentals.
>>
>> So why did you download an illegal copy?
>> You don't think that is stealing?
>>
>> Hint: It doesn't matter if the movie stinks.
>
> Damn, you are an anal asshole.
>>
>>>> A great example you set for your daughter.
>>> I download Doctor Who and Torchwood from BBC. Doctor Who is on
>>> Sci-Fi but Torchwood is on a digital channel I can't get.
>>> I spent over $3,000 a few years back buying 3 sets of 27" NTSC
>>> televisions, VCR's, and DVD players (NTSC only), so I am not
>>> hurrying to buy 3 HDTV setups or converters.
>>
>> Why?
>
> 3 real HDTVs (1920 x 1080P) would be about $6,000, for starters.
> Most of the wide screen sets at China-mart are not true HDTVs.
> They do have some wide screens that are only 780P or 1080I and will
> most likely be obsolete themselves if the FCC enforces the true 1080P.
> Considering the past, I doubt if the FCC will do the right thing.
> In addition I don't like spending that much anywhere since I know I
> will be supporting 'COMMUNIST' China.
> Add to that the fact that I have about $2,000 of VHS movies and about
> a thousand in DVDs that would be rendered useless along with my VCRs
> and DVD players and it gets to be more $$$ than I want to spend on
> sitting on my butt mode.

Media mogul Conrad Black had loads of money. Didn't stop him getting sent
to prison for stealing more.

On Mar 5, 10:54*am, Bill Baka <bb...@comcast.net> wrote:
> plenty...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >> It might be more complicated than this. They are said to have back doors in
> >> *standard protocols* (Linux included) [1,2,3,4] and these are hard to get by
> >> unless you are a security professional (I'm not). What about hardware-based
> >> hacks [5] (in which case "Intel" might be just an abbreviation)? Remember that
> >> they just need to sniff packets and then decrypt successfully in order to gain
> >> remote access.
>
> > Finally a mature response. I was beginning to think I was dealing with
> > 11-year-olds.
>
> If you don't think the NSA (or anybody else) gets into your computer,
> how about this, my experience so far. I used a torrent engine to
> download 'Dreamgirls' for my daughter. What I got was a crappy copy and
> a nasty e-mail from the MPAA police.
> About 30 years ago I got a visit from 2 FBI gorillas in $1,000 suits
> knocking on my door (at home, 8:00 P.M.) for a very minor infraction of
> FCC regulations, and they gave me a pink ticket and a warning that if I
> dot another warning it would be a RED ticket. The RED ticket is one step
> from having you license pulled for a year.
> If you don't think the FBI monitors your activities just write something
> that says "A$$a$$inate p-r-e-s-i-d-e-n-t 'WEED'" in it and wait for the
> FBI at your door.
> I'm not paranoid, I have been hassled over trivial stuff.
> A few years back, like 2004 (I think) I was detained by both DHS and FBI
> agents on duty at Beale A.F.B. for riding my bike on a PUBLIC road and
> taking a few pictures with me 1.2 M Pixel fixed focus el-cheapo camera.
> Even after proving I was born here, 3rd generation, they held me for a
> local Sheriff to pick me up and take me straight home with the bike
> loosely in his trunk.
> They do it because they can.
> Bill Baka

You're obviously a bad seed.

Hadron wrote:
> Bill Baka <bbaka@comcast.net> writes:
>
>> Sebastian G. wrote:
>>>
>>> Maybe you're just too stupid to understand ARP and PPPoE?

Always an insult for a response?

>> Stupid does not apply here.
>> Lack of motivation does apply.
>> I am now past 30 years of computer use.
>> In 1978 I took home a 300 baud acoustic terminal and dialed into the
>> mainframe at work to play Star Trek against the computer.
>> Bill Baka
>
> Yes. very good. But how thats supposed to help you understand modern HW
> and networking protocols is anybodies guess. My grandad had gas lighting
> - but he can't wire a plug.

DUH, I am an engineer, analog hardware, so nothing intimidates me.
I am not an IT geek, but most that I have had to work with were pretty
much clueless anyway. Money motivates me. A network quirk doesn't until
it causes me problems.
Same Hadron as on the bicycle group apparently, always insulting.
Bill Baka
BTW, I don't live by the computer, but I am bored enough right now to
feed an argument. Now that the weather is getting better I will be out
riding for health rather than posting here. I don't HAVE to work.

Hadron wrote:
> AZ Nomad <aznomad.2@PremoveOBthisOX.COM> writes:
>
>> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 16:19:16 -0800 (PST), plenty900@yahoo.com <plenty900@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I've learned that there are bits of NSA's SELinux in various
>>> places in kernel 2.6. How can I be sure that Big Brother isn't
>>> using back doors or bugs to break into my computer?
>>> Especially with all the illegal spying done these days...
>>> How much safer would it be to just switch back to 2.4 or 2.5?
>> Read the fucking source code! Thousands of others have and there
>> are no backdoors. When you build a kernel, it is from the source
>> code and if the source code has no backdoors, then the compiled
>> kernel won't either.
>
> Assuming you read the code to each and every application which runs
> under root. Assuming you have read the code for the compiler.
>
> COLA seems to hold some of the brightest C gurus in the whole world!

Agreed.
Linux tends to have the true code geeks and windows the visual whatever.
I can say that I have used visual C and it sucks/blows bad enough to
drive away any self respecting programmers.
Bill Baka

Bill Baka <bbaka@comcast.net> writes:

> Hadron wrote:
>> Bill Baka <bbaka@comcast.net> writes:
>>
>>> Sebastian G. wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Maybe you're just too stupid to understand ARP and PPPoE?
>
> Always an insult for a response?
>
>>> Stupid does not apply here.
>>> Lack of motivation does apply.
>>> I am now past 30 years of computer use.
>>> In 1978 I took home a 300 baud acoustic terminal and dialed into the
>>> mainframe at work to play Star Trek against the computer.
>>> Bill Baka
>>
>> Yes. very good. But how thats supposed to help you understand modern HW
>> and networking protocols is anybodies guess. My grandad had gas lighting
>> - but he can't wire a plug.
>
> DUH, I am an engineer, analog hardware, so nothing intimidates me.

Nothing?

Well it seems you didn't know why your card was flickering.

My analogy there stands. I have a background in digital circuitry but
that doesn't mean I can rewire an electromagnet coil.

Nothing insulting. Just a fact. It seems you like to strut but don't
like being corrected or having your short comings pointed out. If you're
going to strut then you can only expect someone to point these things
out.

Especially in the context of your paranoia about big brother hounding
you ....

Bill Baka <bbaka@comcast.net> writes:

> Hadron wrote:
>> AZ Nomad <aznomad.2@PremoveOBthisOX.COM> writes:
>>
>>> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 16:19:16 -0800 (PST), plenty900@yahoo.com <plenty900@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've learned that there are bits of NSA's SELinux in various
>>>> places in kernel 2.6. How can I be sure that Big Brother isn't
>>>> using back doors or bugs to break into my computer?
>>>> Especially with all the illegal spying done these days...
>>>> How much safer would it be to just switch back to 2.4 or 2.5?
>>> Read the fucking source code! Thousands of others have and there
>>> are no backdoors. When you build a kernel, it is from the source
>>> code and if the source code has no backdoors, then the compiled
>>> kernel won't either.
>>
>> Assuming you read the code to each and every application which runs
>> under root. Assuming you have read the code for the compiler.
>>
>> COLA seems to hold some of the brightest C gurus in the whole world!
>
> Agreed.

(?!?!?)

> Linux tends to have the true code geeks and windows the visual whatever.
> I can say that I have used visual C and it sucks/blows bad enough to
> drive away any self respecting programmers.
> Bill Baka

What particular "features" of Visual C "sucks" for your needs?

On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 20:10:43 -0800, Bill Baka wrote:

> Hadron wrote:
>> AZ Nomad <aznomad.2@PremoveOBthisOX.COM> writes:
>>
>>> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 16:19:16 -0800 (PST), plenty900@yahoo.com <plenty900@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've learned that there are bits of NSA's SELinux in various
>>>> places in kernel 2.6. How can I be sure that Big Brother isn't
>>>> using back doors or bugs to break into my computer?
>>>> Especially with all the illegal spying done these days...
>>>> How much safer would it be to just switch back to 2.4 or 2.5?
>>> Read the fucking source code! Thousands of others have and there
>>> are no backdoors. When you build a kernel, it is from the source
>>> code and if the source code has no backdoors, then the compiled
>>> kernel won't either.
>>
>> Assuming you read the code to each and every application which runs
>> under root. Assuming you have read the code for the compiler.
>>
>> COLA seems to hold some of the brightest C gurus in the whole world!
>
> Agreed.
> Linux tends to have the true code geeks and windows the visual whatever.
> I can say that I have used visual C and it sucks/blows bad enough to
> drive away any self respecting programmers.
> Bill Baka

So how do you explain the fact that most people in COLA are Windows
programmers?



--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

Hadron wrote:
> Bill Baka <bbaka@comcast.net> writes:
>> 3 real HDTVs (1920 x 1080P) would be about $6,000, for starters.
>> Most of the wide screen sets at China-mart are not true HDTVs.
>> They do have some wide screens that are only 780P or 1080I and will
>> most likely be obsolete themselves if the FCC enforces the true 1080P.
>> Considering the past, I doubt if the FCC will do the right thing.
>> In addition I don't like spending that much anywhere since I know I
>> will be supporting 'COMMUNIST' China.
>> Add to that the fact that I have about $2,000 of VHS movies and about
>> a thousand in DVDs that would be rendered useless along with my VCRs
>> and DVD players and it gets to be more $$$ than I want to spend on
>> sitting on my butt mode.
>
> Media mogul Conrad Black had loads of money. Didn't stop him getting sent
> to prison for stealing more.

URL, please.
I downloaded 1 new movie to check it out, BFD.
I have also been 'stealing' James Cagney movies and "The day the Earth
stood still", a Sci-Fi classic.
Who am I stealing from if all the actors are dead?
I would like to buy them but they just aren't offered for sale.
If I recorded them on a VCR and filed them away would that be stealing.
TCM shows them with no commercials so a VHS recording is the same as I
would get from a torrent download.
That renders the piracy issue into a moot point.

Let's stop the insanity. I know this is cross posted AND OT so let's not
pursue it here. We are just wasting bandwidth here.
Bill Baka

cc wrote:
> On Mar 5, 10:54 am, Bill Baka <bb...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> I'm not paranoid, I have been hassled over trivial stuff.
>> A few years back, like 2004 (I think) I was detained by both DHS and FBI
>> agents on duty at Beale A.F.B. for riding my bike on a PUBLIC road and
>> taking a few pictures with me 1.2 M Pixel fixed focus el-cheapo camera.
>> Even after proving I was born here, 3rd generation, they held me for a
>> local Sheriff to pick me up and take me straight home with the bike
>> loosely in his trunk.
>> They do it because they can.
>> Bill Baka
>
> You're obviously a bad seed.

Not really. I will argue a point though, which is probably why I got the
'courtesy' ride. I did get irate at the idiot black goon who went
through my pictures to see if I had any 'sensitive' pictures. I think he
was the FBI half of the Keystone cops. Look up Keystone cops and silent
movies if you don't get the reference.
Bill Baka

Hadron wrote:
> Bill Baka <bbaka@comcast.net> writes:
>
>> Hadron wrote:
>>> Bill Baka <bbaka@comcast.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> Sebastian G. wrote:
>>>>> Maybe you're just too stupid to understand ARP and PPPoE?
>> Always an insult for a response?
>>
>>>> Stupid does not apply here.
>>>> Lack of motivation does apply.
>>>> I am now past 30 years of computer use.
>>>> In 1978 I took home a 300 baud acoustic terminal and dialed into the
>>>> mainframe at work to play Star Trek against the computer.
>>>> Bill Baka
>>> Yes. very good. But how thats supposed to help you understand modern HW
>>> and networking protocols is anybodies guess. My grandad had gas lighting
>>> - but he can't wire a plug.
>> DUH, I am an engineer, analog hardware, so nothing intimidates me.
>
> Nothing?
>
> Well it seems you didn't know why your card was flickering.

I haven't looked into it except to chase a few lights.
The router flickers on the Internet side even when my computer is off.
When it is on the port for the master computer flickers, as does my NIC
in the computer, and it gets stopped there. Why do I say this? My hard
drive never activates like it would if an attack actually got through.
>
> My analogy there stands. I have a background in digital circuitry but
> that doesn't mean I can rewire an electromagnet coil.

You can't wind wire in a circle?
>
> Nothing insulting. Just a fact. It seems you like to strut but don't
> like being corrected or having your short comings pointed out. If you're
> going to strut then you can only expect someone to point these things
> out.

I'm not strutting. I came here hoping to learn and maybe contribute but
these off topic arguments keep happening. Maybe I start them by mistake
and that is my shortcoming. I have been able to rebuild a car from the
ground up since I was 16 and it was a financial necessity. Try
rebuilding a 1954 Buick Dynaflow without a manual sometime. I just learn
on an as needed basis along with the stuff that gets me curious.
>
> Especially in the context of your paranoia about big brother hounding
> you ....

Not me, everybody. The average city dweller gets his face recorded on a
camera at least 50 times a day. ATMs, 7-11 type markets, traffic
cameras, and the latest, police cameras with directional microphones on
every corner, already in the pilot stage in Sacramento. They can pan and
zoom and listen to 2 people walking down the sidewalk. The police love
it, the people either hate it or love it, mostly hate it.
That is Big Brother in action.
Coming next to your house, indoor cameras and microphones.
Bush is wiping his ass with the Constitution.
Bill Baka

Hadron wrote:
> Bill Baka <bbaka@comcast.net> writes:
>> Linux tends to have the true code geeks and windows the visual whatever.
>> I can say that I have used visual C and it sucks/blows bad enough to
>> drive away any self respecting programmers.
>> Bill Baka
>
> What particular "features" of Visual C "sucks" for your needs?

I don't like the program generating code for me when if I try to modify
some part of it to optimize it breaks it.
I did a simple "Hello world" and the executable was 1.5 MB.
Labview gave me about a 30K file and Borland gave me a 15K file and no
window.
I hate programs that try to think for me and do a shoddy job.
Simple, huh?
Bill Baka

Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
> So how do you explain the fact that most people in COLA are Windows
> programmers?
>
>
>
Masochists?
Bill

On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 04:37:33 +0100, Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:
>AZ Nomad <aznomad.2@PremoveOBthisOX.COM> writes:

>> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 16:19:16 -0800 (PST), plenty900@yahoo.com <plenty900@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>I've learned that there are bits of NSA's SELinux in various
>>>places in kernel 2.6. How can I be sure that Big Brother isn't
>>>using back doors or bugs to break into my computer?
>>>Especially with all the illegal spying done these days...
>>>How much safer would it be to just switch back to 2.4 or 2.5?
>>
>> Read the fucking source code! Thousands of others have and there
>> are no backdoors. When you build a kernel, it is from the source
>> code and if the source code has no backdoors, then the compiled
>> kernel won't either.

>Assuming you read the code to each and every application which runs
>under root. Assuming you have read the code for the compiler.

Let's turn that around, fuckface. Please name a single part of the kernel
that nobody has examined in detail. You don't have to read every
single line to know that somebody else has. Many many people have.

On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 05:13:25 +0100, Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:
>Bill Baka <bbaka@comcast.net> writes:

>> Hadron wrote:
>>> AZ Nomad <aznomad.2@PremoveOBthisOX.COM> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 16:19:16 -0800 (PST), plenty900@yahoo.com <plenty900@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I've learned that there are bits of NSA's SELinux in various
>>>>> places in kernel 2.6. How can I be sure that Big Brother isn't
>>>>> using back doors or bugs to break into my computer?
>>>>> Especially with all the illegal spying done these days...
>>>>> How much safer would it be to just switch back to 2.4 or 2.5?
>>>> Read the fucking source code! Thousands of others have and there
>>>> are no backdoors. When you build a kernel, it is from the source
>>>> code and if the source code has no backdoors, then the compiled
>>>> kernel won't either.
>>>
>>> Assuming you read the code to each and every application which runs
>>> under root. Assuming you have read the code for the compiler.
>>>
>>> COLA seems to hold some of the brightest C gurus in the whole world!
>>
>> Agreed.

>(?!?!?)

>> Linux tends to have the true code geeks and windows the visual whatever.
>> I can say that I have used visual C and it sucks/blows bad enough to
>> drive away any self respecting programmers.
>> Bill Baka

>What particular "features" of Visual C "sucks" for your needs?

Every single non-standard extension to the language. Every single
way in which a "visual C" program can't run on anything but windows is
what makes it suck.

On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 23:14:48 -0500, Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> wrote:

>So how do you explain the fact that most people in COLA are Windows
>programmers?

they aren't, shit-for-brains.

Bill Baka <bbaka@comcast.net> writes:

> Hadron wrote:
>> Bill Baka <bbaka@comcast.net> writes:
>>> 3 real HDTVs (1920 x 1080P) would be about $6,000, for starters.
>>> Most of the wide screen sets at China-mart are not true HDTVs.
>>> They do have some wide screens that are only 780P or 1080I and will
>>> most likely be obsolete themselves if the FCC enforces the true 1080P.
>>> Considering the past, I doubt if the FCC will do the right thing.
>>> In addition I don't like spending that much anywhere since I know I
>>> will be supporting 'COMMUNIST' China.
>>> Add to that the fact that I have about $2,000 of VHS movies and about
>>> a thousand in DVDs that would be rendered useless along with my VCRs
>>> and DVD players and it gets to be more $$$ than I want to spend on
>>> sitting on my butt mode.
>>
>> Media mogul Conrad Black had loads of money. Didn't stop him getting sent
>> to prison for stealing more.
>
> URL, please.
> I downloaded 1 new movie to check it out, BFD.
> I have also been 'stealing' James Cagney movies and "The day the Earth
> stood still", a Sci-Fi classic.
> Who am I stealing from if all the actors are dead?


The people who bought the rights. Their estates?

OK. We have ascertained you are a pirate.

Next subject.

Bill Baka <bbaka@comcast.net> writes:

> Hadron wrote:
>> Bill Baka <bbaka@comcast.net> writes:
>>> Linux tends to have the true code geeks and windows the visual whatever.
>>> I can say that I have used visual C and it sucks/blows bad enough to
>>> drive away any self respecting programmers.
>>> Bill Baka
>>
>> What particular "features" of Visual C "sucks" for your needs?
>
> I don't like the program generating code for me when if I try to
> modify some part of it to optimize it breaks it.

It didn't generate any code for you. It linked stuff in which you
selected.

> I did a simple "Hello world" and the executable was 1.5 MB.

See above.

> Labview gave me about a 30K file and Borland gave me a 15K file and no
> window.

And no window? What?

> I hate programs that try to think for me and do a shoddy job.
> Simple, huh?
> Bill Baka

Well, a simple solution yes. You clearly don't know how to use it. Sorry
and all that.

AZ Nomad <aznomad.2@PremoveOBthisOX.COM> writes:

> On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 04:37:33 +0100, Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>AZ Nomad <aznomad.2@PremoveOBthisOX.COM> writes:
>
>>> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 16:19:16 -0800 (PST), plenty900@yahoo.com <plenty900@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I've learned that there are bits of NSA's SELinux in various
>>>>places in kernel 2.6. How can I be sure that Big Brother isn't
>>>>using back doors or bugs to break into my computer?
>>>>Especially with all the illegal spying done these days...
>>>>How much safer would it be to just switch back to 2.4 or 2.5?
>>>
>>> Read the fucking source code! Thousands of others have and there
>>> are no backdoors. When you build a kernel, it is from the source
>>> code and if the source code has no backdoors, then the compiled
>>> kernel won't either.
>
>>Assuming you read the code to each and every application which runs
>>under root. Assuming you have read the code for the compiler.
>
> Let's turn that around, fuckface. Please name a single part of the kernel
> that nobody has examined in detail. You don't have to read every
> single line to know that somebody else has. Many many people have.

That's not turning anything around - it's just repeating your own
nonsense. Please re-read what I said.

AZ Nomad <aznomad.2@PremoveOBthisOX.COM> writes:

> On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 05:13:25 +0100, Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>Bill Baka <bbaka@comcast.net> writes:
>
>>> Hadron wrote:
>>>> AZ Nomad <aznomad.2@PremoveOBthisOX.COM> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 16:19:16 -0800 (PST), plenty900@yahoo.com <plenty900@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I've learned that there are bits of NSA's SELinux in various
>>>>>> places in kernel 2.6. How can I be sure that Big Brother isn't
>>>>>> using back doors or bugs to break into my computer?
>>>>>> Especially with all the illegal spying done these days...
>>>>>> How much safer would it be to just switch back to 2.4 or 2.5?
>>>>> Read the fucking source code! Thousands of others have and there
>>>>> are no backdoors. When you build a kernel, it is from the source
>>>>> code and if the source code has no backdoors, then the compiled
>>>>> kernel won't either.
>>>>
>>>> Assuming you read the code to each and every application which runs
>>>> under root. Assuming you have read the code for the compiler.
>>>>
>>>> COLA seems to hold some of the brightest C gurus in the whole world!
>>>
>>> Agreed.
>
>>(?!?!?)
>
>>> Linux tends to have the true code geeks and windows the visual whatever.
>>> I can say that I have used visual C and it sucks/blows bad enough to
>>> drive away any self respecting programmers.
>>> Bill Baka
>
>>What particular "features" of Visual C "sucks" for your needs?
>
> Every single non-standard extension to the language. Every single
> way in which a "visual C" program can't run on anything but windows is
> what makes it suck.

Well, lets ignore your obvious bias and looniness and consider that he
probably used it in a Windows Environment for Windows.

Now, maybe we can list the issues which "sucked" for him. And reading
his other post it sounds like another wannabe hacker who simple couldn't
be arsed to learn how to use the product.

FWIW, I dont like too many non-standard extensions. But it is a windows
compiler for Windows so you cant mark it down for that I am afraid.

Your hatred for Windows is palpable and makes you a poor judge.

In article <slrnfsts7f.gm3.syscjm@sumire.gwu.edu>,
Chris Mattern <syscjm@sumire.gwu.edu> wrote:

> That's like describing an airplane as being a flight plan.

Anyone who has looked at the code of newcomers to object oriented
programming would not be at all surprised to find an airplane being a
flight plan! :-)

--
--Tim Smith

In article <slrnfsuv47.sa8.aznomad.2@ip70-176-155-130.ph.ph.cox.net>,
AZ Nomad <aznomad.2@PremoveOBthisOX.COM> wrote:
> >What particular "features" of Visual C "sucks" for your needs?
>
> Every single non-standard extension to the language. Every single
> way in which a "visual C" program can't run on anything but windows is
> what makes it suck.

Do you have any opinion on the gcc extensions to the language?


--
--Tim Smith

Bill Baka wrote (in part):

> I haven't looked into it except to chase a few lights.
> The router flickers on the Internet side even when my computer is off.
> When it is on the port for the master computer flickers, as does my NIC
> in the computer, and it gets stopped there. Why do I say this? My hard
> drive never activates like it would if an attack actually got through.

My router has one input from the Internet called WAN and one used that goes
to my main computer called LAN1. It collects data on the traffic. At the
moment, it says:

Receive Transmit
WAN 5108461 Packets 4359430 Packets
LAN 8721841 Packets 7301912 Packets
WIRELESS 0 Packets 0 Packets

Now I would expect that every packet received by the LAN would be
transmitted by the WAN, and every packet received by the WAN would be
transmitted to the LAN. (Wireless is disabled since I do not need it.)

This is pretty clearly not the case. My Isp talks to my router using PPPoE,
and my router talks to my computer using regular ethernet, so I would expect
some discrepancy. This is more than I intuitively expect, but I have not
analyzed anything.

--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 08:45:01 up 22 days, 14:56, 1 user, load average: 4.24, 4.22, 4.14

Bill Baka wrote:
> Hadron wrote:
>> AZ Nomad <aznomad.2@PremoveOBthisOX.COM> writes:
>>
>>> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 16:19:16 -0800 (PST), plenty900@yahoo.com
>>> <plenty900@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've learned that there are bits of NSA's SELinux in various
>>>> places in kernel 2.6. How can I be sure that Big Brother isn't
>>>> using back doors or bugs to break into my computer?
>>>> Especially with all the illegal spying done these days...
>>>> How much safer would it be to just switch back to 2.4 or 2.5?
>>> Read the fucking source code! Thousands of others have and there
>>> are no backdoors. When you build a kernel, it is from the source
>>> code and if the source code has no backdoors, then the compiled
>>> kernel won't either.
>>
>> Assuming you read the code to each and every application which runs
>> under root. Assuming you have read the code for the compiler.

It also assumes that the compiler on your machine is the one you have code
for, and I do not know how you could tell that. Because if you do not, you
could have clean source code for the compiler, but the compiler you have
could already be compromised in such a way that anything it produced
(including the new compiler) could be compromised also. At some point,
unfortunately, you have to take all this on faith.

>> COLA seems to hold some of the brightest C gurus in the whole world!
>
> Agreed.
> Linux tends to have the true code geeks and windows the visual whatever.
> I can say that I have used visual C and it sucks/blows bad enough to
> drive away any self respecting programmers.

I have been a programmer, and I pretty-much respect myself. The Visual C++ I
used from Microsoft in 1996-8 was so bad it drove me to Linux (Red Hat Linux
5.0 at the time). Of course, Windows 95 helped me want to make the move also.

--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 09:35:01 up 22 days, 15:46, 1 user, load average: 4.19, 4.08, 4.07

Hadron wrote:

> What particular "features" of Visual C "sucks" for your needs?

I could not stand the inter-process communication. It caused deadlocks. I
had an application requiring running many cooperating sequential processes,
some of which used the windowing system. Now the way Visual C++ worked at
the time (I do not know what it does now), it generated a main program that
was the same all the time (it may have been identical, linked from a
library; I no longer recall). And it contained as the main loop a wait for
keyboard and mouse events. If the program was waiting for one of them, you
were screwed if the program received a message from another process: you
would not get it until someone did a keyboard or mouse action. You could not
get the source for that part of the program, so you could not change that
either. Alternatively, if it were waiting for a message from another
process, it would not see keyboard or mouse events until it got the message.

This made it pretty much useless unless you abandoned the Visual C++ and
wrote everything some other way. They should have used a single IPC
mechanism instead of two.

--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 09:40:01 up 22 days, 15:51, 1 user, load average: 4.16, 4.14, 4.09

Jean-David Beyer wrote:


> Receive Transmit
> WAN 5108461 Packets 4359430 Packets
> LAN 8721841 Packets 7301912 Packets
> WIRELESS 0 Packets 0 Packets
>
> Now I would expect that every packet received by the LAN would be
> transmitted by the WAN, and every packet received by the WAN would be
> transmitted to the LAN. (Wireless is disabled since I do not need it.)


See? You have now clue how networks function.

Jean-David Beyer wrote:
> Bill Baka wrote (in part):
>
>> I haven't looked into it except to chase a few lights.
>> The router flickers on the Internet side even when my computer is off.
>> When it is on the port for the master computer flickers, as does my NIC
>> in the computer, and it gets stopped there. Why do I say this? My hard
>> drive never activates like it would if an attack actually got through.
>
> My router has one input from the Internet called WAN and one used that goes
> to my main computer called LAN1. It collects data on the traffic. At the
> moment, it says:
>
> Receive Transmit
> WAN 5108461 Packets 4359430 Packets
> LAN 8721841 Packets 7301912 Packets
> WIRELESS 0 Packets 0 Packets
>
> Now I would expect that every packet received by the LAN would be
> transmitted by the WAN, and every packet received by the WAN would be
> transmitted to the LAN. (Wireless is disabled since I do not need it.)
>
> This is pretty clearly not the case. My Isp talks to my router using PPPoE,
> and my router talks to my computer using regular ethernet, so I would expect
> some discrepancy. This is more than I intuitively expect, but I have not
> analyzed anything.
>
There are so many resons why that intuition is wrong, that I dont
actually no where to begin..

- DHCP between router and ISP
- packet fragmentation
- NTP between router and WAN.
- ping and other probing attacks on the router from hackers.
- keepalive stuff at the PPP level
- possible maintenance probes by the ISP

thats all wan only stuff.

Then there are issues on the LAN..you may or may not be accessing te
router..without going further upstream.. for DHCP, DNS, ARP..general LAN
traffic if there is e.g. a printer using the same internal network and
its a muilti-port switch or repeater..

If uyou