1 INFO-VAX	Sun, 02 Sep 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 488       Contents:+ Re: Back with another user account question + Re: Back with another user account question / Re: CA Masterpiece for VMS v3.0 --- please help $ Compatible hard drives for VS4000/60( Re: Compatible hard drives for VS4000/60! How to trace pop server attacks ?  Re: I hate Compaq  Re: I hate Compaq  Re: Some postive points I hope.   RE: VMS 7.3 compatibility issues4 Re: Wailing at Eunuchs (was: Wailing and Moaning...)  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2001 18:23:29 +0010 % From: paddy.o'brien@zzz.tg.nsw.gov.au 4 Subject: Re: Back with another user account question5 Message-ID: <01K7VD6V88020044TP@tgmail.tg.nsw.gov.au>   
 >Hello again,  > J >Thanks to all that gave me some tips on creating and modifying users.  I  was H >able to go back and change some of the variables on the user that I hadH >created, but...  whenever I tried to log on with said user account, the: >system would log me off immediately w/o an error message. > E >Is there a log where I could check for error messages or see what is  >happening?  Any ideas?  >  >Cheers, >  >Mat  @ One of several ways is from an active session to use $ SET HOST.  G I guess you are going throught one of the emulators from Windows, or a   DECwindow login.  L If your method of logging in leaves a NETSERVER.LOG, that should also leave  an error message.    Regards, Paddy      , Return-path: <Info-VAX-Request@mvb.saic.com>< Received: from vaccine.tg.nsw.gov.au (vaccine.tg.nsw.gov.au  [203.32.225.150]) .  by tgmail.tg.nsw.gov.au (PMDF V5.2-32 #33154)I  with ESMTP id <01K7T8QKXT7G004LS2@tgmail.tg.nsw.gov.au> for obrien@GECKO 7  (ORCPT rfc822;paddy.o+27brien@zzz.tg.nsw.gov.au); Sat,   1 Sep 2001 05:54:14 +10:00 0 Received: from scarab.tg.nsw.gov.au (unverified)=  by vaccine.tg.nsw.gov.au (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.1) @  with SMTP id <T55b8bd3469cb20e1960fd@vaccine.tg.nsw.gov.au> forC  <paddy.o'brien@zzz.tg.nsw.gov.au>; Sat, 01 Sep 2001 05:53:47 +1000 J Received: by scarab.tg.nsw.gov.au; (5.65v4.0/1.3/10May95) id AA14513; Sat,  01 Sep 2001 06:05:53 +1000 % Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 20:05:45 +0100 * From: Mat Riain <matei@no.spam.eircom.net>0 Subject: Back with another user account question To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com . Reply-to: Mat Riain <matei@no.spam.eircom.net>0 Message-id: <BrRj7.6082$s5.69023@news.indigo.ie>. Organization: Eircom.Net http://www.eircom.net8 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
 X-Priority: 3  X-MSMail-priority: Normal 0 Nntp-Posting-Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 20:20:01 BST! X-Complaints-To: abuse@eircom.net 7 X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 999285601 159.134.224.228 (Fri,   31 Aug 2001 20:20:01 BST) X-Gateway-From: mvb.saic.com	 Lines: 15  X-Gateway-source-info: USENET  X-Newsgroups: comp.os.vms 6 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700: Original-recipient: rfc822;paddy.o'brien@zzz.tg.nsw.gov.au   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2001 13:42:19 +0200" From: "Hans Vlems" <hvlems@iae.nl>4 Subject: Re: Back with another user account question( Message-ID: <9mt5vv$n6o$1@news.IAEhv.nl>    Log on with SYSTEM and try this:  * $ MC AUTHORIZE MOD thisuser/FLAG=NODISUSER  F Should that fail, please post the results of MC AUTHORIZE SHOW DEFAULT   Hans  5 Mat Riain <matei@no.spam.eircom.net> wrote in message * news:BrRj7.6082$s5.69023@news.indigo.ie... > Hello again, > J > Thanks to all that gave me some tips on creating and modifying users.  I was I > able to go back and change some of the variables on the user that I had I > created, but...  whenever I tried to log on with said user account, the ; > system would log me off immediately w/o an error message.  > F > Is there a log where I could check for error messages or see what is > happening?  Any ideas? > 	 > Cheers,  >  > Mat  >  >    ------------------------------  $ Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2001 17:32:10 +1000/ From: "Phil Howell" <phowell@snowyhydro.com.au> 8 Subject: Re: CA Masterpiece for VMS v3.0 --- please help. Message-ID: <Eglk7.24$Nw4.2139@ozemail.com.au>  ; "Nivlesh Chandra" <NChandra001@itc.gov.fj> wrote in message G news:084681714A1BD511970B0002A560015F2D774F@exchange01.govnet.gov.fj...  > Hello * > we are using CA Masterpiece for VMS v3.0K > There is a file called unp.dat that contains a record of all the journals J > that are processed. Also it contains entries for journals that have beenK > deleted. This file (as I have been told by CA) needs to be analysed every J > month or so so that the deleted entries (which are useless ) are removed and I > only the posted journal entries are kept. I am not too knowledgeable in  thisI > . thus if someone could explain this to me I would really appreciate it  ... J > also if you could point out the utility to use ... it would be very much > appreciated. > 	 > Nivlesh E have a look in your mp30_com directory for rmstune.com or v3dv200.com A what it boils down to is an analyze/fdl followed by a convert/fdl  Phil   ------------------------------   Date: 2 Sep 2001 14:33:26 GMT - From: forkosh@panix2.panix.com (John Forkosh) - Subject: Compatible hard drives for VS4000/60 ) Message-ID: <9mtfvm$j7a$1@news.panix.com>   / Which digital hard drives are (mechanically and 3 electrically) compatible with a VAXstation 4000/60? 7 That is, will mount neatly in the plastic "drive cage", + have the appropriate 50-pin connector, etc. 7 Also, must be capable of installing VMS (unlike RZ23L), 4 and preferably 2.1GB or greater.  (And anything else I forgot to ask.)  Thanks, John (forkosh@panix.com)   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2001 18:50:53 +0200 * From: Mike Rechtman <rechtman@tzora.co.il>1 Subject: Re: Compatible hard drives for VS4000/60 * Message-ID: <3B92636D.6030808@tzora.co.il>   $ sho licen /charge * VMS/LMF Charge Information for node TALTAL6 This is a VAXstation 4000-VLC, hardware model type 339G Type: A, * Not Permitted *      (VAX/VMS Capacity or OpenVMS Unlimited   or Base)   <snipped...> $    $ sho dev d /full   I Disk TALTAL$DKA100:, device type RZ26L, is online, mounted, file-oriented 1      device, shareable, error logging is enabled.   >      Error count                    0    Operations completed 	      2920 3      Owner process                 ""    Owner UIC   [SYSTEM]2      Owner process ID        00000000    Dev Prot  S:RWPL,O:RWPL,G:R,W =      Reference count               73    Default buffer size  	       512 ;      Total blocks             2050860    Sectors per track  	        83 =      Total cylinders             3089    Tracks per cylinder  	         8     @ I think RZ26L (1 GB) is the largest supported inside a 4000 VLC.I Just remember the memory constraints: A VLC recognizes no more than 24MB, F and TCP/IP V5.0 or V5.1 requires 32MB, so that if you want a supportedI configuration don't go above OVMS V6.2 and UCX V4.2 (+patches, ECOs etc.)    ~Mike    John Forkosh wrote:   1 > Which digital hard drives are (mechanically and 5 > electrically) compatible with a VAXstation 4000/60? 9 > That is, will mount neatly in the plastic "drive cage", - > have the appropriate 50-pin connector, etc. 9 > Also, must be capable of installing VMS (unlike RZ23L), 6 > and preferably 2.1GB or greater.  (And anything else > I forgot to ask.)  Thanks, > John (forkosh@panix.com) >      --  E --------------------------------------------------------------------- E Usual disclaimer: All opinions are mine alone, perhaps not even that. ? Mike Rechtman                            *rechtman@tzora.co.il* E Kibbutz Tzor'a.                          Voice (home):(972)-2-9908337 C    "20% of a job takes 80% of the time, the rest takes another 80%" E --------------------------------------------------------------------- * ------ GEEK CODE BLOCK (Version: 3.1)-----( GCM/CS d(-)pu s:+>:- a++ C++ U-- L-- W++' N++ K? w--- V+++$ PS+ PE-- t X- tv-- b+  DI+ D-- G e++ h--- r+++ y+++@ * ---------- END GEEK CODE BLOCK  ----------   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2001 09:42:40 +0200> From: "Jean-Francois Marchal" <jean-francois.marchal@x9000.fr>* Subject: How to trace pop server attacks ?. Message-ID: <9msnkg$71a$1@reader1.imaginet.fr>   Bonjour  tous ...  # Here is an extract of my pop log ..   K 2001-09-02 09:36:11 thread 0: network write bytes = 1, requested bytes = 78 > 2001-09-02 09:36:11 thread 0: Output Buffer Dump: (Length = 1) 2001-09-02 09:36:11 thread 0: D % 2001-09-02 09:36:11 thread 0: blocked @ 2001-09-02 09:36:11 thread 0: issue_client_unblock_timer enteredE 2001-09-02 09:36:11 thread 0: issue_client_unblock_timer using time 0  00:00:02.00 ( 2001-09-02 09:36:13 thread 0: continuingL 2001-09-02 09:36:13 thread 0: network write bytes = 59, requested bytes = 78? 2001-09-02 09:36:13 thread 0: Output Buffer Dump: (Length = 59)  2001-09-02 09:36:14 thread 0: ; SX8DVLGkkUo5l1YAsJxlQHMr6NDbUH6MyJAnMYaCGISY6CWALrzsc9IAB7g % 2001-09-02 09:36:14 thread 0: blocked @ 2001-09-02 09:36:14 thread 0: issue_client_unblock_timer enteredE 2001-09-02 09:36:14 thread 0: issue_client_unblock_timer using time 0  00:00:02.00 ( 2001-09-02 09:36:16 thread 0: continuingL 2001-09-02 09:36:16 thread 0: network write bytes = 39, requested bytes = 78? 2001-09-02 09:36:16 thread 0: Output Buffer Dump: (Length = 39) E 2001-09-02 09:36:16 thread 0: MiNLkkAjhKs572TPhRpruFoE82Q9C4dQgWz3s09 % 2001-09-02 09:36:16 thread 0: blocked @ 2001-09-02 09:36:16 thread 0: issue_client_unblock_timer enteredE 2001-09-02 09:36:16 thread 0: issue_client_unblock_timer using time 0  00:00:02.00 ( 2001-09-02 09:36:18 thread 0: continuingL 2001-09-02 09:36:18 thread 0: network write bytes = 19, requested bytes = 78? 2001-09-02 09:36:18 thread 0: Output Buffer Dump: (Length = 19) 1 2001-09-02 09:36:18 thread 0: ALaBJF8BAGVsZW1lbnR % 2001-09-02 09:36:18 thread 0: blocked @ 2001-09-02 09:36:18 thread 0: issue_client_unblock_timer enteredE 2001-09-02 09:36:18 thread 0: issue_client_unblock_timer using time 0  00:00:02.00 ( 2001-09-02 09:36:20 thread 0: continuing   Seems to be an attack ... H Would you have any suggestion to know a bit more about who is attacking,+ and maybe how to react to such an attack ..   
 Thanks to all  Jean-Franois Marchal  X9000 - LYON   ------------------------------   Date: 2 Sep 2001 11:11:24 GMT ( From: nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren) Subject: Re: I hate Compaq0 Message-ID: <9mt44s$c4i$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>  3 In article <oUSeMIrZmepE@eisner.encompasserve.org>, . Larry Kilgallen <Kilgallen@SpamCop.net> wrote: > A >Actually, I think things have gotten better now that the bulk of ( >the debugger is in a different process.  A They SHOULD have got better - they have actually got worse.  Note ? that I am NOT referring to the junk debuggers that you have got B on Microsoft and similar junk systems, but the "best of the breed" dating from the 1970s.  ? The problem is related to ISA design and virtual machines.  For = a debugger to run "bulletproof" in other process is easy, but ? it requires virtually the same facilities that are necessary to < be able to run the sub-process as a virtual machine.  If you' think about it, that is pretty obvious.   = In particular, this is why hardware designers are so wrong in < their common refusal to provide emulation and virtualisation: facilities.  It isn't that they are often needed for those? purposes, but their absence means that debuggers and other such ; tools necessarily have to be kludged up and are necessarily  unreliable.   > And, despite claims, there ISN'T an overhead problem on modern< machines - there is merely an attitude problem.  It would be; trivial to extend a process state by a bit map saying which > instructions should be emulated, and to have this inspected by: instruction decoding.  But it needs to be designed in from6 scratch, as bolting it on later may well be a problem.  = The same thing applies to synchronous interrupts, in general, > and a lot of other things that cause debugger writers to sweat= blood fighting the ISA and operating system interfaces.  They B should NOT need privilege to handle properly and, on well-designed architectures, they don't.  ? [ And, to take an example, this would be more than just trivial , in an ISA like IA-64, for obvious reasons! ]  A >Since modern debuggers have just a small execution engine in the B >same process context as the program being debugged, there is lessF >to be trashed.  To eliminate that remaining possibility would requireA >running in inner mode, so the program with the buffer overrun or A >bad pointer arithmetic (another flaw from the past) cannot trash # >data that belongs to the debugger.   @ Why the heck do they need an execution engine in a location thatA can be trashed by the debugged program AT ALL?  Earlier debuggers ? didn't.  Well, the answer is misdesign of the ISA and operating  system interfaces :-(   : >Of course one of the things a debugger does is show you a= >symbolic trace of the stacks for various tasks (threads, for = >C folks).  But if the application under test has trashed the 9 >stack badly enough, there is not much there to show you.  > 8 >A debugger _could_ set up an intercept to keep a shadow< >copy of the stack in inner mode memory, solving that issue.  < There are better techniques, which were in common use in the> 1970s.  But, hell, what did those cavemen know about anything?  > >Personally I have no desire to pay higher prices so operating= >systems will include a debugger that robust, since those are  >not problems I encounter.  > No higher prices needed - a debugger that robust would pay for> itself before first release, by reducing the development costs? and time to release.  There is a lot of evidence for this, too. < So what you are actually paying is higher prices for a worse product :-(      On another matter:  , Tim Shoppa <shoppa@trailing-edge.com> wrote: > = > It's not everything to all people (and it certainly doesn't < > compare to a real debugger on a real high-level language),= > but Rational's Purify is remarkable in its ability to catch D > many of the scores of memory corruption errors in every C program.  A Remarkable?  Not really.  I regard it as very pedestrian, and not @ very useful - such mechanisms used to be built-in and are prettyF trivial to implement (I have done so more than once).  More seriously,; they pick up only the simpler of the errors, and the really A nasty ones still get through - but you have heard me on THAT rant  against C before :-)  D However, this isn't the point that I am making about the reliability? of debuggers.  Even a perfect checking mechanism would tackle a D separate problem (i.e. that of trapping end programmer errors beforeB they get the environment knotted).  I am talking about the need toA work out what the hell is going on when there is a problem in the + infrastructure, or the checking has failed.   @ And, as always, the fact that 90% of the problems are trivial isC not an indication that 90% of the cost is easy to eliminate.  There D have been many problems on the system that I manage that have caused? users to give up because there were precisely 3 people with the 6 expertise to investigate, and none of us had the time.     Regards, Nick Maclaren,* University of Cambridge Computing Service,> New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QG, England. Email:  nmm1@cam.ac.uk/ Tel.:  +44 1223 334761    Fax:  +44 1223 334679    ------------------------------   Date: 2 Sep 2001 10:55:23 -0500 - From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)  Subject: Re: I hate Compaq3 Message-ID: <aBwmRflV9nEZ@eisner.encompasserve.org>   [ In article <9mt44s$c4i$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>, nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren) writes: 5 > In article <oUSeMIrZmepE@eisner.encompasserve.org>, 0 > Larry Kilgallen <Kilgallen@SpamCop.net> wrote: >>B >>Actually, I think things have gotten better now that the bulk of) >>the debugger is in a different process.  > = > They SHOULD have got better - they have actually got worse.   8 While that may be your experience, it has not been mine.  A > The problem is related to ISA design and virtual machines.  For ? > a debugger to run "bulletproof" in other process is easy, but A > it requires virtually the same facilities that are necessary to 6 > be able to run the sub-process as a virtual machine.  ? From my perspective, instruction set specification is somethingc> quite far out of my control.  I don't recall ever encountering< virtualization capabilities on machines I have used (PDP-10,= PDP-8, DG Nova, PDP-11, VAX, Motorola 68K, Alpha), so if they0' were present I did not know about them.   < But I don't see why an inner mode debugger would not be just= as good for user mode programs.  But as I indicated, I mostly(< stay away from C so mysterious stack clobbers are quite rare in my world.  ? >>Personally I have no desire to pay higher prices so operating > >>systems will include a debugger that robust, since those are >>not problems I encounter.n > @ > No higher prices needed - a debugger that robust would pay for@ > itself before first release, by reducing the development costsA > and time to release.  There is a lot of evidence for this, too.a> > So what you are actually paying is higher prices for a worse
 > product :-(t  = While that may be your "magic bullet", mine is strongly typedo> programming languages.  Different strokes for different folks.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2001 18:27:08 +0010 % From: paddy.o'brien@zzz.tg.nsw.gov.aua( Subject: Re: Some postive points I hope.5 Message-ID: <01K7VDBDXWYA0044TP@tgmail.tg.nsw.gov.au>o   Richard,  H >Perhaps an /IMAGE restore could be done faster, with the target volume 
 >MOUNT/FOR> >???  I won't have an opportunity any time soon to experiment.  6 An image restore must have the volume mounted foreign.   Regards, Paddy   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2001 12:52:45 -0400+ From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@compaq.com>0) Subject: RE: VMS 7.3 compatibility issues R Message-ID: <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4D49603@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>  5 As a fyi, the program John is referring to is called b sys$system:SRM_CHECK.EXE n  : Additional information can be found at: (Section 8 pg.8-1)L http://www.openvms.compaq.com/doc/73final/documentation/pdf/OVMS_73_REL_NOTE S.pdf    Regards,  
 Kerry Main Senior Consultantn Compaq Canada Corp.1 Professional Services  Voice: 613-592-4660: Fax  :  819-772-7036 Email: Kerry.Main@Compaq.com     -----Original Message-----' From: John Santos [mailto:JOHN@egh.com]u Sent: September 1, 2001 8:05 PMX To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Coma) Subject: Re: VMS 7.3 compatibility issues-    " On Sun, 2 Sep 2001, Kenneth wrote:  I > I am using EV5 processor and want to upgrade to EV6 (21264a) processor.oH > Compaq says I need to recompile my C program with the C version 6.0 orJ > above. Does anyone out there has the problem in running your application inK > EV6 which is compile with C below 6.0? Or do you have encounter any third22 > party product which is not compatiable with EV6?  C Normally, no you don't have to recompile.  However, there was a buge@ in some old compilers (actually in the GEM optimizer) that couldB generate incorrect code sequences.  These sequences worked fine onD EV5 and before, but could break on an EV6.  The newer compilers haveC this bug fixed, so recompiling guarantees it won't bite you.  ThereeC is also a program you can run which will scan an image and tell youtF if the invalid code sequences occur.  (It can get false positives fromG data that looks like code.)  I can't remember the name of this program, 0 but it should be in the V7.0-V7.2 release notes.  C If you are only intending to run your programs on your new EV6, you A can recompile with the right optimization switches and get better A performance.  (If you optimize for EV6 and run the resulting .EXEa> on EV5, it will work, but it might be slower than it would run# un-optimized or optimized for EV5.)l  A Generally 3rd party products are compiled without optimization oreA with generic optimizations, to get performance that is acceptablenA everywhere rather than great performance on some systems and poor-? performance on others.  Something that is specifically intendedo? for high performance might be shipped either as source (compileo@ on-site) or as multiple object libraries optimized for differentA systems, or as multiple .EXE's.  We usually ship object librariess for the most flexibility.9   -- A John Santos@ Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539   ------------------------------   Date: 2 Sep 2001 10:04:53 CDTa= From: wayne@tachysoft.xxx.374515.killspam.015f (Wayne Sewell) = Subject: Re: Wailing at Eunuchs (was: Wailing and Moaning...).. Message-ID: <eAruy3VWULpf@tachxxsoftxxconsult>  b > In article <9moepd$2mjf$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >  > $ >> No VMS Admin or Operator has everD >> accidently mounted the wrong tape with a write-ring installed??    N Yet another reason to use tapesys at a site with operators and lots of tapes. O If you mount the wrong tape, tapesys will dismount it and tell you to mount thelO correct one.  Of course, backup itself will check labels if one is specified innJ the backup command, but it has no idea what tapes are in use and which are2 scratch tapes.  tapesys keeps track of such stuff.   -- sO =============================================================================== M Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738  wayne@tachysoft.xxxm: http://www.tachysoft.xxx/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html  K change .xxx to .com in addresses above, assuming you are not a spambot  :-)eO ===============================================================================lH Randolph Duke (in Trading Places): "Mother always said you were greedy.". Mortimer Duke: "She meant it as a compliment!"   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.488 ************************