1 INFO-VAX	Mon, 03 May 2004	Volume 2004 : Issue 245       Contents:# Re: 11:05 PM Encompass Wake Up Call # Re: 11:05 PM Encompass Wake Up Call # Re: 11:05 PM Encompass Wake Up Call   Re: Another sneak preview - V8.2  Re: Another sneak preview - V8.2! Another VMS marketing opportunity % Re: Another VMS marketing opportunity  Re: Asdk the Wizard ?  RE: Asdk the Wizard ?  Re: BNU ACCVIO$ Re: Callable XML Parser for OpenVMS?> Re: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ...> Re: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ...> Re: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ...> Re: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ...> RE: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ...P Re: non-system but priviledged account OK for installing layered         productP RE: non-system but priviledged account OK for installing layered         productP Re: non-system but priviledged account OK for installing layered         productP Re: non-system but priviledged account OK for installing layered         productP Re: non-system but priviledged account OK for installing layered         productK Re: non-system but priviledged account OK for installing layered  products? P Re: non-system but priviledged account OK for installing layered products? produ4 Secure Web Server Version 2.0 available for download8 Re: Secure Web Server Version 2.0 available for download8 RE: Secure Web Server Version 2.0 available for download% Re: SEVMS (was: how to turn LinuX...) % Re: SEVMS (was: how to turn LinuX...)  T4 and TLViz  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2004 09:24:16 -0700 0 From: chrisfrancis@ameritech.net (Chris Francis), Subject: Re: 11:05 PM Encompass Wake Up Call= Message-ID: <37771eb2.0405030824.4e1e8113@posting.google.com>   C I also received this call. I called Encompass the following morning D and left a message indicating how displeased I was with their timingD of this call, and I requested to be put on their Do Not Call List. IE received an e-mail from them later that day. They apologized and said C that the intention was to call work numbers after hours so that the ? message would be waiting for everyone in their voicemail boxes.   j tutor <tutor_removespam_@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message news:<4ut590dr2qckon2pa5b76cptof4h99pvph@4ax.com>... > Ok, > >    Did anyone else receive a call last night from ENCOMPASS? > ; > I received a 11:05 pm recorded message from Encompass....  > D > Not sure how they got my number. I've never paid for membership...
 > Oh wait.- > Maybe that's why they call AFTER 11 pm !!!!  > ? > If you have paid membership, they call during NORMAL BUSINESS  > hours????  >  > 	 > Jerrold    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 03 May 2004 09:27:30 -0700 + From: "Barry Treahy, Jr." <Treahy@MMaz.com> , Subject: Re: 11:05 PM Encompass Wake Up Call' Message-ID: <409672F2.3010702@MMaz.com>    Chris Francis wrote:  D >I also received this call. I called Encompass the following morningE >and left a message indicating how displeased I was with their timing E >of this call, and I requested to be put on their Do Not Call List. I F >received an e-mail from them later that day. They apologized and saidD >that the intention was to call work numbers after hours so that the@ >message would be waiting for everyone in their voicemail boxes. >    > C IMHO, that still is not an acceptable answer when you consider the  " number of SOHO situations today...     Barry    --    > Barry Treahy, Jr                       E-mail: Treahy@MMaz.com> Midwest Microwave                          Phone: 480/314-1320> Vice President & CIO                         FAX: 480/661-7028                            ------------------------------  $ Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 11:37:05 -0500( From: "Jenny Butler" <jbutler@utmem.edu>, Subject: Re: 11:05 PM Encompass Wake Up Call3 Message-ID: <00ce01c4312c$dea1e350$1806c084@jennyb>   > The problem with call work numbers late is that system managerB types (like myself) have paging off our work phones, so a computer= problem will call my work phone and I get a page - 2:00 am or 6 whatever.  I would have much preferred a simple email!                      FWIW - Jenny ----- Original Message -----  + From: "Barry Treahy, Jr." <Treahy@MMaz.com>  To: <Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com> # Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 11:27 AM , Subject: Re: 11:05 PM Encompass Wake Up Call     > Chris Francis wrote: > F > >I also received this call. I called Encompass the following morningG > >and left a message indicating how displeased I was with their timing G > >of this call, and I requested to be put on their Do Not Call List. I H > >received an e-mail from them later that day. They apologized and saidF > >that the intention was to call work numbers after hours so that theB > >message would be waiting for everyone in their voicemail boxes. > >    > > E > IMHO, that still is not an acceptable answer when you consider the  $ > number of SOHO situations today... >  >  > Barry  >  > --   > @ > Barry Treahy, Jr                       E-mail: Treahy@MMaz.com@ > Midwest Microwave                          Phone: 480/314-1320@ > Vice President & CIO                         FAX: 480/661-7028 >                          >  >  >    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 03 May 2004 03:18:03 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> ) Subject: Re: Another sneak preview - V8.2 , Message-ID: <4095F1FE.1D4EE220@teksavvy.com>   Paul Sture wrote: J > In the light of Larry's reply to Joshua Lehrer, BACKUP does not know theH > size of a saveset on tape, so "% completed" here is either meaningless: > or could only refer to the current file being processed.  M Well, software could be made flexible enough to provide % when available, and C just not provide it if not (eg: disk save set versus tape saveset).   N Note that on a MAC prior to OS-X, the "COPY" operation builds an internal listJ of files to copy before starting the operation and is thus able to provideL overall % complete. However, its file system is much faster than that of VMSL so it is easier for it to scan through and extract all necessary information' before commencing the actual data copy.   L Honestly, I would prefer to see more time added to matching functions on VAX) than adding that <ctrl-t> thing for COPY.   H However, for me, the improvement to copy I'd like to see is a /LOG/BRIEFI function where only the source file would be listed as the copy operation M progresses (filename only). This would not only provide a neater display, but 3 also allow piping the output into something useful.    ------------------------------  $ Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 18:01:27 +0200, From: "Hans Vlems" <hvlems.dotweg@zonnet.nl>) Subject: Re: Another sneak preview - V8.2 8 Message-ID: <c75qgk$1cfe$1@ID-143435.news.uni-berlin.de>  9 "Paul Sture" <nospam@sture.homeip.net> schreef in bericht 3 news:c74ju9$i6e26$1@ID-132135.news.uni-berlin.de...  > Paul Sture wrote:  > > Hans Vlems wrote:  > > B > >> "Guy Peleg" <guy.peleg@remove_this_hp.com> schreef in bericht) > >> news:4094c677@usenet01.boi.hp.com...  > >>, > >>> Here is another sneak preview of V8.2: > >>> 3 > >>> We have added a CTRL-T AST routine, to report ' > >>> the progress of a COPY operation.  > >>>  > >>> Here is a small example: > >>> 0 > >>> IPL31> copy sys$system:sysdump.dmp [] /logK > >>> IPL31::GUY 12:55:12 COPY      CPU=00:00:00.88 PF=3295 IO=1025 MEM=260 ? > >>> Copying: SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSEXE]SYSDUMP.DMP;1 (0% completed) + > >>>          2921 blocks copied of 375777 K > >>> IPL31::GUY 12:55:18 COPY      CPU=00:00:01.02 PF=3300 IO=1196 MEM=265 ? > >>> Copying: SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSEXE]SYSDUMP.DMP;1 (3% completed) , > >>>          13589 blocks copied of 375777K > >>> IPL31::GUY 12:55:33 COPY      CPU=00:00:01.22 PF=3300 IO=1551 MEM=265 ? > >>> Copying: SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSEXE]SYSDUMP.DMP;1 (9% completed) , > >>>          35941 blocks copied of 375777K > >>> IPL31::GUY 12:56:00 COPY      CPU=00:00:01.63 PF=3300 IO=2212 MEM=265 @ > >>> Copying: SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSEXE]SYSDUMP.DMP;1 (20% completed), > >>>          77724 blocks copied of 375777 > >>> 4 > >>> As usual, your feedback is highly appreciated. > >>>  > >>> Guy Peleg  > >>> OpenVMS Engineering  > >>>  > >>>  > >>>  > >>K > >> That's very useful, especially the "% completed" part. Would it be too F > >> difficult to add that string to BACKUP's output; when restoring a > >> saveset that is?  > >  > >> > > D > > I like the "% completed" part too, so I'll second that question. > >  > J > In the light of Larry's reply to Joshua Lehrer, BACKUP does not know theH > size of a saveset on tape, so "% completed" here is either meaningless: > or could only refer to the current file being processed. >   K My request was not too precisely worded. I meant "while restoring a saveset  that resides on disk".I I doubt that COPY knows the size of a file when it uses tapes on input so  the same restriction would apply, right?    ------------------------------  $ Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 11:19:11 -0400# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> * Subject: Another VMS marketing opportunity, Message-ID: <2e2dnWjQ6o9s_wvdRVn-ug@igs.net>  L http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=1212&e=4&u=/afp/20040503/tc> _afp/internet_virus_finland_banking_company_sampo&sid=96001018  I What do you want to bet that HP does nothing with events such as these to  advertise and promote OpenVMS?  J There should be several full page ads in the major Finnish, and indeed allF the Scandanvian and countries which touch the Baltic tomorrow morning, extolling the virtues of VMS.   K Despite the fact that it was only the retail branches closed, how any other J banks around the world might be impacted by this bank's decision to close?I What's the cost of lost business? What's the cost of keeping Microsoft in K your organization for key infrastructure? What's the 'ripple effect'? Every J major financial publication  world-wide ought to have an OpenVMS ad in the next issue.   < My prediction: HP will do nothing. IBM & Sun will advertise.   ----------------    , Finnish bank closes to ward off Sasser virus  K HELSINKI (AFP) - Sampo, Finland's third largest bank, closed its 130 branch C offices across the country to prevent the Sasser Internet worm from  infecting its systems.  G The Sasser bug has so far contaminated millions of computers worldwide, 5 making them shut down and restart in an endless loop.   H "We decided to close our offices as a precaution, since we knew that ourK virus protection hadn't been updated," Sampo spokesman Hannu Vuola told AFP 
 on Monday.  J "It is possible that we have some minor problems with this (worm) already,G so this was the best decision to avoid any serious problems," he added.   C Sampo is Finland's third largest bank with over a million customers L nationwide. Its corporate and Internet banking services were not affected by the shut down, Vuola said.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 03 May 2004 18:54:14 +0200 " From: labadie <labadie_g@decus.fr>. Subject: Re: Another VMS marketing opportunity2 Message-ID: <c75tua$o9q$1@news-reader5.wanadoo.fr>   John Smith a crit :N > http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=1212&e=4&u=/afp/20040503/tc@ > _afp/internet_virus_finland_banking_company_sampo&sid=96001018 > K > What do you want to bet that HP does nothing with events such as these to   > advertise and promote OpenVMS?  9 I am pretty confident, there will be nothing in the press    :-(   E If I was CEO of this bank who needs to close a few days because of a  / virus, I would fire imeediately the head of IT.   
 Astounding   ------------------------------  $ Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 13:14:30 -0400, From: "warren sander" <warren.sander@hp.com> Subject: Re: Asdk the Wizard ?, Message-ID: <40967e8d$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com>   Tom   K The basic problem with your request is in Knowing that a wizard number is a . wizard number and not just a number in parens.  K A lot of the ATW q/a have code fragments, programs, dcl commands, formula's - etc. and the base of the info is a notes file H so everything is 'text based' Also we went through a lot of finagling to6 make sure that if folks type in HTML that the HTML wasH displayed and it wasn't 'interpreted' by either my extraction program or4 your browser. That keeps weird things from happeningL to your browser if you looked at something nasty that got through. We really4 haven't had any problems but I'd rather error on theD side of safety and keep the questions/answers in a base text format.  H Yes it would be nice to see (546) and click it to open wiz_0546.html but/ what I do is open another browser and construct ? the url (or use the put the number in to see the q/a function).   I We still haven't finished removing the "digital's" from some of the q/a's , and we were supposed to do that in 1998. Now. we also need to get rid of the compaq's also..  K Steve has answered in excess of 8000 questions during the life of ATW. I've @ had to reformat, recreate, repost all them at least 8 times with= new look/feel and other add-on's like the date last modified.   K I am currently dreading the day when Question number 10000 comes in cause I ; only set up my programs for 4 digit numbers. I will have to L re-write a bunch of stuff for 5 digit numbers. Hey at one point they thought) there would only be 20-30 of these total.       . "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> wrote in message3 news:NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIMELADCAA.tom@kednos.com...  >  > @ > I wonder if you could make tool to parse the text and make URL > substitutions. > For example, from 8876:  > G >   Please also consider reading through at least some of the following  >   existing discussions:  > D >     (546), (2312), (2407), (2631), (2696), (3202), (3280), (5173),$ >     (6447), (7504), likely others. > H > upon encountering the comma delimited list of parentheses encapsulated	 > number, ) > extract the number and build the string * > "http://h71000.www7.hp.com/wiz_546.html"K > number make the substitution (after validating that the number is a valid  > reference) >  > (546)  for= > <A HREF="http://h71000.www7.hp.com/wiz_546.html"> (546)</A>  > I > in the text. Of course, this assumes that all the pages behave the same  and H > that one can recognize the references.  How many pages are there?  Are there F > any such entries  longer than 32K characters each (so I could put an entire > page into a PL/I string)?    ------------------------------  $ Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 10:47:11 -0700# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>  Subject: RE: Asdk the Wizard ?9 Message-ID: <NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIMEOFDCAA.tom@kednos.com>   8 I see the problem.  I wonder what an offshore firm would< charge to edit 8000 pages:-)  OTOH, I imagine a parsing tool# could get a fairly high percentage.      -----Original Message-----3   From: warren sander [mailto:warren.sander@hp.com] %   Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 10:15 AM    To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com     Subject: Re: Asdk the Wizard ?         Tom    B   The basic problem with your request is in Knowing that a wizard 
   number is a 0   wizard number and not just a number in parens.   D   A lot of the ATW q/a have code fragments, programs, dcl commands,    formula's /   etc. and the base of the info is a notes file J   so everything is 'text based' Also we went through a lot of finagling to8   make sure that if folks type in HTML that the HTML wasJ   displayed and it wasn't 'interpreted' by either my extraction program or6   your browser. That keeps weird things from happening<   to your browser if you looked at something nasty that got    through. We really6   haven't had any problems but I'd rather error on theF   side of safety and keep the questions/answers in a base text format.   J   Yes it would be nice to see (546) and click it to open wiz_0546.html but1   what I do is open another browser and construct A   the url (or use the put the number in to see the q/a function).    K   We still haven't finished removing the "digital's" from some of the q/a's .   and we were supposed to do that in 1998. Now0   we also need to get rid of the compaq's also..   D   Steve has answered in excess of 8000 questions during the life of    ATW. I've B   had to reformat, recreate, repost all them at least 8 times with?   new look/feel and other add-on's like the date last modified.    C   I am currently dreading the day when Question number 10000 comes     in cause I=   only set up my programs for 4 digit numbers. I will have to B   re-write a bunch of stuff for 5 digit numbers. Hey at one point    they thought+   there would only be 20-30 of these total.          0   "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> wrote in message5   news:NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIMELADCAA.tom@kednos.com...    >    > B   > I wonder if you could make tool to parse the text and make URL   > substitutions.   > For example, from 8876:    > I   >   Please also consider reading through at least some of the following    >   existing discussions:    > F   >     (546), (2312), (2407), (2631), (2696), (3202), (3280), (5173),&   >     (6447), (7504), likely others.   > J   > upon encountering the comma delimited list of parentheses encapsulated   > number, +   > extract the number and build the string ,   > "http://h71000.www7.hp.com/wiz_546.html"C   > number make the substitution (after validating that the number     is a valid   > reference)   >    > (546)  for?   > <A HREF="http://h71000.www7.hp.com/wiz_546.html"> (546)</A>    > K   > in the text. Of course, this assumes that all the pages behave the same    and J   > that one can recognize the references.  How many pages are there?  Are   there H   > any such entries  longer than 32K characters each (so I could put an   entire   > page into a PL/I string)?          --- (   Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.<   Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).B   Version: 6.0.667 / Virus Database: 429 - Release Date: 4/23/2004    --- & Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.667 / Virus Database: 429 - Release Date: 4/23/2004   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2004 10:07:56 -0700 $ From: gspamtackett@yahoo.com (Galen) Subject: Re: BNU ACCVIO = Message-ID: <bdc65a53.0405030907.32f6e463@posting.google.com>   v koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote in message news:<jvDPUPx6TqFJ@eisner.encompasserve.org>... > C >    I did reverse-engineer BNU enough to make mozilla it's default D >    browser, but its not supported and I don't know what version of. >    VMS I had it working on.  Probably 7.2-1. >   B Bob, I've been doing a little work along this line under V7.3-2. IF haven't yet grasped how BNU hands off the name of file to open. If youC (or anyone else reading this) knows the details could you post them  here?    Thanks,    Galen    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 03 May 2004 15:13:55 GMT  From: danco@ns2.pebble.org- Subject: Re: Callable XML Parser for OpenVMS? 1 Message-ID: <slrnc9ckmh.hep.danco@ns2.pebble.org>   
 In articleF <OFBA540C37.2412A8BC-ON85256E44.00769B51-85256E44.0076C87F@metso.com>, norm.raphael@metso.com wrote:   K > I have been told that we will be receiving XML documents, and they want a  > way toF > read them into a program, parse the data out, and deal with the data > appropriately.+ > Is there a way to do this?  Alternatives?     E IMHO, LIBXML2 is the best (and it builds on OpenVMS).  Google for it.    - Dan    ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2004 06:40:57 -0700 2 From: williamwebb@openvms-rocks.com (William Webb)G Subject: Re: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ... = Message-ID: <bf98c417.0405030540.3748b57d@posting.google.com>   ~ "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net> wrote in message news:<40945A9A.7DCC34C4@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net>... > Nic Clews wrote: > >  > > Paul Sture wrote:  > > >  > > > Karsten Nyblad wrote: N > > > > "Andrew Harrison" <andrew_._remove_harrison@su_n.com> wrote in message2 > > > > news:c6ntl3$nvf$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com... > > > > C > > > >>So far in this thread we have had Bob K making claims about @ > > > >>UNIX authentication which are incorrect and Bob C makingC > > > >>claims about the relatie Security of OpenVMS vs UNIX namely A > > > >>that OpenVMS cannot be infected with virii which are also  > > > >>incorrect. >  ... > > > N > > > Oh, but as I remember it, VMS did have security logs with V4.0. Not diskM > > > logs as they later became, because the concept then was to log messages  > > > to a hardcopy terminal.  > > L > > Actually I know a couple of sites that up until quite recently still ranG > > with the LA120 paper consoles, religiously stowing away the logs as  > > "evidence".  > > F > > Version 3? version 2? Not sure when the systems were installed but; > > Paul's right that the "electronic" log is a moot point.  > > J > > We're back in the days when VMS systems were hackers (easier) targets,K > > 1200 baud modems were starting to become commonplace, and is of the era H > > that the current phreak information is based. Windows were something > > that let the Sun in. > E > As recently as summer of 2000, I was at a shop where they STILL had E > VAXes (no production Alphas) using LA120s for OPCOM terminals - the F > consoles were connected to a PCM box (that was the only Alpha in the > shop).  F Around the later part of the VAX 4000 era, this mutated into of having> an LA75 slaved off of a VT320 that was hooked up to a console.  E (VT420s were the default console but we replaced ours with a VT320.     @ Why?  Because we used handheld VHF radios to communicate betweenF computer room and end-user locations when we were setting people up or troubleshooting.  F The VT420s went completely nuts if someone standing at the patch panelF hit the transmit button; the VT320s, on the other hand, didn't seem to mind a little RF at all.)   @ You also got to experience the joy of coming in to the office onD Monday morning to find that the console printer had either jammed or9 run out of paper over the weekend, with the concomitant .   ( Hadn't thought of that in quite a while.   WWWebb   WWWebb   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2004 07:00:40 -0700 2 From: williamwebb@openvms-rocks.com (William Webb)G Subject: Re: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ... < Message-ID: <bf98c417.0405030600.8c82665@posting.google.com>  p jealousxmp@aol.commonplace (jealous xmp) wrote in message news:<20040501103835.17707.00000722@mb-m04.aol.com>...? > >wrong ... VMS has all the services that everything else has, ? > >telnet, ethernet, SSH, webservers, FTP ... a buffer overflow ? > >is a buffer overflow, only on VMS these exploits are twarted ; > >with that nasty "ACCESS VIOLATION" error time after time  > L > There are things like W^X, PAX, gr-security, SE linux, stack guard, formatO > guard, and more that are helping linux and bsd.  With unix, there are trusted N > systems like Trusted HP-UX and Trusted Solaris.  Unix can also use chrootingO > which helps a bit.  And trusted variants mean the local root exploits are not  > as useful. > P > As I understand it, the usual stack overflows won't work on VMS because of theQ > non-executable stack.  Not sure about heap overflows or format bugs.  I've seen 5 > a DCL script exploited on a web site before though.  > P > There is/was a hardened (trusted even?) form of VMS.  I don't know the detailsC > and how this compares to some of the trusted and hardened unices.  > 	 > Michael   F The product was called SEVMS and it hardened VMS to the point where itB got a B2 rating, a letter/number combination that, in Redmond, can/ only be found at bingo games from time to time.    WWWebb     WWWebb   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2004 09:21:41 -0600 - From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) G Subject: Re: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ... 3 Message-ID: <aBwT12WkJqLD@eisner.encompasserve.org>   q In article <bf98c417.0405030600.8c82665@posting.google.com>, williamwebb@openvms-rocks.com (William Webb) writes: r > jealousxmp@aol.commonplace (jealous xmp) wrote in message news:<20040501103835.17707.00000722@mb-m04.aol.com>...  Q >> There is/was a hardened (trusted even?) form of VMS.  I don't know the details D >> and how this compares to some of the trusted and hardened unices. >>  
 >> Michael > H > The product was called SEVMS and it hardened VMS to the point where it > got a B2 rating,  E B1, actually.  As I recall, the SEVMS evaluation lacks timing channel 	 analysis.   @ That aspect to a certain extent has to do with external politicsA between DEC and the evaluation contractors (who are more familiar  with other operating systems).   ------------------------------  $ Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 15:47:44 +0100< From: "Alex Daniels" <AlexNOSPAMTHANKSDaniels@themail.co.uk>G Subject: Re: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ... ) Message-ID: <c75m1p$rh5$1@news.wplus.net>   : "Larry Kilgallen" <Kilgallen@SpamCop.net> wrote in message- news:aBwT12WkJqLD@eisner.encompasserve.org... > > In article <bf98c417.0405030600.8c82665@posting.google.com>,4 williamwebb@openvms-rocks.com (William Webb) writes:= > > jealousxmp@aol.commonplace (jealous xmp) wrote in message 6 news:<20040501103835.17707.00000722@mb-m04.aol.com>... > K > >> There is/was a hardened (trusted even?) form of VMS.  I don't know the  details F > >> and how this compares to some of the trusted and hardened unices. > >> > >> Michael > > J > > The product was called SEVMS and it hardened VMS to the point where it > > got a B2 rating, > G > B1, actually.  As I recall, the SEVMS evaluation lacks timing channel  > analysis.  > B > That aspect to a certain extent has to do with external politicsC > between DEC and the evaluation contractors (who are more familiar   > with other operating systems).  L If we are talking about SEVMS, we should note it is NOT being ported to I64,E hey its not like VMS needs any more customers let alone the big sites  who would buy it..   Alex   ------------------------------  $ Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 08:19:46 -0700# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> G Subject: RE: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ... 9 Message-ID: <NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIIENPDCAA.tom@kednos.com>      -----Original Message-----C   From: Alex Daniels [mailto:AlexNOSPAMTHANKSDaniels@themail.co.uk] $   Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 7:48 AM   To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com I   Subject: Re: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ...     <   "Larry Kilgallen" <Kilgallen@SpamCop.net> wrote in message/   news:aBwT12WkJqLD@eisner.encompasserve.org... @   > In article <bf98c417.0405030600.8c82665@posting.google.com>,6   williamwebb@openvms-rocks.com (William Webb) writes:?   > > jealousxmp@aol.commonplace (jealous xmp) wrote in message 8   news:<20040501103835.17707.00000722@mb-m04.aol.com>...   > >   > >> There is/was a hardened (trusted even?) form of VMS.  I   don't know the	   details H   > >> and how this compares to some of the trusted and hardened unices.   > >>   > >> Michael   > > L   > > The product was called SEVMS and it hardened VMS to the point where it   > > got a B2 rating,   > I   > B1, actually.  As I recall, the SEVMS evaluation lacks timing channel 
   > analysis.    > D   > That aspect to a certain extent has to do with external politicsE   > between DEC and the evaluation contractors (who are more familiar "   > with other operating systems).  ?   If we are talking about SEVMS, we should note it is NOT being    ported to I64,G   hey its not like VMS needs any more customers let alone the big sites    who would buy it..  C It would have to conform to the Common Criteria, which replaced the F Orange Book in 1998.  B2 IIRC required Mandatory Access Control, which$ I guess would put it at E-5 level(?)       Alex         --- (   Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.<   Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).B   Version: 6.0.667 / Virus Database: 429 - Release Date: 4/23/2004   --- & Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.667 / Virus Database: 429 - Release Date: 4/23/2004   ------------------------------  $ Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 09:57:00 -0400# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> Y Subject: Re: non-system but priviledged account OK for installing layered         product , Message-ID: <0t2dnVHsc_Qz0gvdRVn-gQ@igs.net>  . "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> wrote in message3 news:NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIIENGDCAA.tom@kednos.com...  >  >  >   -----Original Message-----, >   From: John Smith [mailto:a@nonymous.com]& >   Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2004 2:54 PM >   To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com E >   Subject: Re: non-system but priviledged account OK for installing  >   layered products?  >  >  > D >   "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net> wrote >   in message4 >   news:40946382.84E5FE7B@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net... >   > Michael Austin wrote:  >   > > E >   > > it also is depending on the layered product you are trying to  install.A >   > > IBM's MQSeries will ONLY install, startup and/or shutdown  >   with the user : >   > > SYSTEM. MQSeries is much like the old DECMessageQ. >   > D >   > I was given to understand that MQseries *IS* DECmessageq, someL >   > generations removed, just as SLS is descended from an early version of >   > TapeSys. >  > K >   I don't believe that to be the case, though I could be wrong. We looked  atL >   both early on (1993-94 if memory serves) and they were different enough,, >   certainly not inter-.operable back then. > E >   Speaking of message queueing products, are there any JMQ products 
 >   out there H >   that work on VMS? I'm curious for a new project we are working on. I haveI >   not scoured the waterfront about this, but for a while it looked like B >   DECmessageQ (BEA) was not going to make the Itanic port (since rectified), G >   and MQ Series's VMS version has always been a step or two behind in E >   releases. Long time ago there was one from ASCI (which was the MQ 
 >   precursor E >   IIRC) and one from Momentum Software (I think). Any other current  VMS-able$ >   message queue product out there? > D > DECMessageQ was written in PL/I and BEA needed to have the product	 avaialble K > before 2005 they decided to (try) to rewrite it in C.  So I guess you can G > expect buffer overruns in the future.  In any event, it will be a new 
 > immature3 > product, not the same that you are familiar with.     J Great, just what VMS needs - buggy key infrastructure software v0.95 . :-(  L Just another instance from the Journal of Completely Avoidable Consequences.  J If the decision by HP not to make the necessary GEM compiler available forL the PL/I port had been thought out by rational management, HP wouldn't be inE the position of possibly losing many VMS customers who run PL/I-based L applications or who are unwilling to re-plumb with v1.0 re-written code. AllG for a measly $500,000 effort on HP's part, an amount which is "rounding ( error" in the annual VMS revenue stream.  I No PL/I, no Ada, no SAP, no Peoplesoft, no big-iron apps, no juicy profit , margins. What a way to mis-manage a company.   ------------------------------  $ Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 07:38:21 -0700# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> Y Subject: RE: non-system but priviledged account OK for installing layered         product 9 Message-ID: <NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIOENNDCAA.tom@kednos.com>      -----Original Message-----*   From: John Smith [mailto:a@nonymous.com]$   Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 7:21 AM   To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com C   Subject: Re: non-system but priviledged account OK for installing    layered products?       5   "Jan-Erik Sderholm" <aaa@aaa.com> wrote in message #   news:4095F854.2BF59997@aaa.com...    > "David J. Dachtera" wrote:   > > D   > > I was given to understand that MQseries *IS* DECmessageq, someL   > > generations removed, just as SLS is descended from an early version of   > > TapeSys.   >    > Not at all !!!   > G   > DECmessageq is the well known (to us) product built by Digital, now =   > owned by BEA under the name BEA MessageQ (but last time I 9   > looked all logicals and files still was called DMQ*).    > 9   > MQ Series is a similar product developed by IBM, with =   > client interfaces for VMS (and a lot of other platforms).    > >   > IMHO, DMQ is a technical superior product, but with a less   > market presens today.:    L   Back in 1993-94, a major business infrastructure provider in the financialI   services community was looking at which message queueing application tot   specifiy for its own use.t  L   Since at that time there was no inter-operability between message queueingF   products, the choice of 'mq' product by that infrastructure providerH   required that each and every customer of the infrastructure provider'sJ   services would be forced to purchase the same product the infrastructure   provider chose.u  I   When the analysis was done, DECmessageQ beat IBM MQ series on technicalmJ   merit and breadth of platform support. However IBM MQ Series was the oneC   chosen for implementation because IBM pointed to advertising theyl   were doingK   for the product, took the key decision makers to play golf, and said thatrL   they were committed to the product through thick and thin. Digital did not@   'sell' their product to those who were making the decision and   did not seem   committed to it.  H   Thus several hundred MQ Series licenses were sold by IBM in 1994-95 toL   customers of this particular infrastructure provider. Most (about 85%) areJ   still in use today, and all have been under maintenace contract with IBME   since day 1. Not a bad source of revenue for a little advertising &e>   marketing effort and telling the customer the 'right thing'.  L As I recall, when I IBM announced the product they also announced ports to a' number of other platforms, such as Sun.u  K   How do I know all this? I was involved in the original study and analysis-G   and am intimately familiar with many of the infrastructure provider'se4   customers technical environments and applications.     Draw your own parallels.  F   HP suffers from the same dirty little secret that Digital did: greatJ   products (many of Digital-heritage) that nobody knows about because theyC   aren't advertised at the product level - too much 'warm and fuzzyu   - we're auL   great company to deal with' advertising and none of 'this specific product'   will solve your problem' advertising.i  >   HP? Oh, aren't they the company that just makes printers and   digital cameraseL   and multimedia PC's? We better go talk to a company that makes servers big$   enough for our needs - IBM or Sun.       ---v(   Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.<   Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).B   Version: 6.0.667 / Virus Database: 429 - Release Date: 4/23/2004   ---o& Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.667 / Virus Database: 429 - Release Date: 4/23/2004   ------------------------------  $ Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 15:27:33 +0100< From: "Alex Daniels" <AlexNOSPAMTHANKSDaniels@themail.co.uk>Y Subject: Re: non-system but priviledged account OK for installing layered         product4) Message-ID: <c75lrn$qi4$1@news.wplus.net>   . "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in message& news:0t2dnVHsc_Qz0gvdRVn-gQ@igs.net...0 > "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> wrote in message5 > news:NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIIENGDCAA.tom@kednos.com...  > >  > >t  > >   -----Original Message-----. > >   From: John Smith [mailto:a@nonymous.com]( > >   Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2004 2:54 PM > >   To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com G > >   Subject: Re: non-system but priviledged account OK for installing  > >   layered products?  > >c > >l > >wF > >   "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net> wrote > >   in message6 > >   news:40946382.84E5FE7B@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net... > >   > Michael Austin wrote: 	 > >   > > G > >   > > it also is depending on the layered product you are trying to 
 > install.C > >   > > IBM's MQSeries will ONLY install, startup and/or shutdown  > >   with the user:< > >   > > SYSTEM. MQSeries is much like the old DECMessageQ. > >   >PF > >   > I was given to understand that MQseries *IS* DECmessageq, someK > >   > generations removed, just as SLS is descended from an early versione of > >   > TapeSys. > >  > >uF > >   I don't believe that to be the case, though I could be wrong. We looked > atF > >   both early on (1993-94 if memory serves) and they were different enough, . > >   certainly not inter-.operable back then. > > G > >   Speaking of message queueing products, are there any JMQ productst > >   out there J > >   that work on VMS? I'm curious for a new project we are working on. I > haveK > >   not scoured the waterfront about this, but for a while it looked likeiD > >   DECmessageQ (BEA) was not going to make the Itanic port (since
 > rectified),hI > >   and MQ Series's VMS version has always been a step or two behind ineG > >   releases. Long time ago there was one from ASCI (which was the MQh > >   precursoroG > >   IIRC) and one from Momentum Software (I think). Any other currento
 > VMS-able& > >   message queue product out there? > >OF > > DECMessageQ was written in PL/I and BEA needed to have the product > avaialbletI > > before 2005 they decided to (try) to rewrite it in C.  So I guess you  can I > > expect buffer overruns in the future.  In any event, it will be a new  > > immature5 > > product, not the same that you are familiar with.  >F > L > Great, just what VMS needs - buggy key infrastructure software v0.95 . :-( >-@ > Just another instance from the Journal of Completely Avoidable
 Consequences.e >vL > If the decision by HP not to make the necessary GEM compiler available forK > the PL/I port had been thought out by rational management, HP wouldn't beo inG > the position of possibly losing many VMS customers who run PL/I-basedcJ > applications or who are unwilling to re-plumb with v1.0 re-written code. AlleI > for a measly $500,000 effort on HP's part, an amount which is "rounding * > error" in the annual VMS revenue stream. >tK > No PL/I, no Ada, no SAP, no Peoplesoft, no big-iron apps, no juicy profitX. > margins. What a way to mis-manage a company. >f    7 The PL/1 compiler for VAX and Alpha is owned by Kednos.o  I Ada Core Technology's GNAT Ada is the alternative planned on OpenVMS I64.a   Alex   ------------------------------  $ Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 11:29:56 -0400# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>tY Subject: Re: non-system but priviledged account OK for installing layered         producth, Message-ID: <3ISdnfUlUKbq-Avd4p2dnA@igs.net>  . "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> wrote in message3 news:NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIOENNDCAA.tom@kednos.com...f >  >lL > As I recall, when I IBM announced the product they also announced ports to al) > number of other platforms, such as Sun.w >p  L True, but Digital had all the ports available then. IBM was still working onH bringing some of the ports up to parity. Back then, MQ Series on VMS wasB always at least 6 months, and often longer behind the AIX version.   ------------------------------  $ Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 11:44:20 -0400# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>uY Subject: Re: non-system but priviledged account OK for installing layered         product , Message-ID: <NvednU0n_7FL9QvdRVn-hg@igs.net>  G "Alex Daniels" <AlexNOSPAMTHANKSDaniels@themail.co.uk> wrote in message # news:c75lrn$qi4$1@news.wplus.net...f0 > "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in message( > news:0t2dnVHsc_Qz0gvdRVn-gQ@igs.net...2 > > "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> wrote in message7 > > news:NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIIENGDCAA.tom@kednos.com...[ > > >  > > >P" > > >   -----Original Message-----0 > > >   From: John Smith [mailto:a@nonymous.com]* > > >   Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2004 2:54 PM! > > >   To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.CompI > > >   Subject: Re: non-system but priviledged account OK for installing  > > >   layered products?y > > >S > > >T > > >EH > > >   "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net> wrote > > >   in message8 > > >   news:40946382.84E5FE7B@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net... > > >   > Michael Austin wrote:Y > > >   > >DI > > >   > > it also is depending on the layered product you are trying toP > > install.E > > >   > > IBM's MQSeries will ONLY install, startup and/or shutdownS > > >   with the userU> > > >   > > SYSTEM. MQSeries is much like the old DECMessageQ.	 > > >   >>H > > >   > I was given to understand that MQseries *IS* DECmessageq, someE > > >   > generations removed, just as SLS is descended from an early> versione > of > > >   > TapeSys. > > >l > > >aH > > >   I don't believe that to be the case, though I could be wrong. We > looked > > atH > > >   both early on (1993-94 if memory serves) and they were different	 > enough, 0 > > >   certainly not inter-.operable back then. > > >aI > > >   Speaking of message queueing products, are there any JMQ products  > > >   out therelL > > >   that work on VMS? I'm curious for a new project we are working on. I > > haveH > > >   not scoured the waterfront about this, but for a while it looked likeF > > >   DECmessageQ (BEA) was not going to make the Itanic port (since > > rectified), K > > >   and MQ Series's VMS version has always been a step or two behind in-I > > >   releases. Long time ago there was one from ASCI (which was the MQt > > >   precursor I > > >   IIRC) and one from Momentum Software (I think). Any other currentR > > VMS-able( > > >   message queue product out there? > > >cH > > > DECMessageQ was written in PL/I and BEA needed to have the product
 > > avaialble0K > > > before 2005 they decided to (try) to rewrite it in C.  So I guess youe > candK > > > expect buffer overruns in the future.  In any event, it will be a newm > > > immature7 > > > product, not the same that you are familiar with.h > >t > >mJ > > Great, just what VMS needs - buggy key infrastructure software v0.95 . :-(l > > B > > Just another instance from the Journal of Completely Avoidable > Consequences.h > >nJ > > If the decision by HP not to make the necessary GEM compiler available foriJ > > the PL/I port had been thought out by rational management, HP wouldn't be > inI > > the position of possibly losing many VMS customers who run PL/I-basedaL > > applications or who are unwilling to re-plumb with v1.0 re-written code. > All.K > > for a measly $500,000 effort on HP's part, an amount which is "roundingS, > > error" in the annual VMS revenue stream. > >lF > > No PL/I, no Ada, no SAP, no Peoplesoft, no big-iron apps, no juicy profit0 > > margins. What a way to mis-manage a company. > >s >  > 9 > The PL/1 compiler for VAX and Alpha is owned by Kednos.   6 Suggest you ask Kednos their plans for PL/I in itanic.    K > Ada Core Technology's GNAT Ada is the alternative planned on OpenVMS I64.d  I I guess you must be glad you don't have to completely recertify your appss for the military.a   ------------------------------  $ Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 10:21:00 -0400# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> T Subject: Re: non-system but priviledged account OK for installing layered  products?, Message-ID: <IfCdndwFdNrTyAvdRVn-jg@igs.net>  3 "Jan-Erik Sderholm" <aaa@aaa.com> wrote in message.! news:4095F854.2BF59997@aaa.com...  > "David J. Dachtera" wrote: > >0B > > I was given to understand that MQseries *IS* DECmessageq, someJ > > generations removed, just as SLS is descended from an early version of > > TapeSys. >t > Not at all !!! >wE > DECmessageq is the well known (to us) product built by Digital, nowt; > owned by BEA under the name BEA MessageQ (but last time I 7 > looked all logicals and files still was called DMQ*).s > 7 > MQ Series is a similar product developed by IBM, withe; > client interfaces for VMS (and a lot of other platforms).  >I< > IMHO, DMQ is a technical superior product, but with a less > market presens today.     J Back in 1993-94, a major business infrastructure provider in the financialG services community was looking at which message queueing application tor specifiy for its own use.   J Since at that time there was no inter-operability between message queueingD products, the choice of 'mq' product by that infrastructure providerF required that each and every customer of the infrastructure provider'sH services would be forced to purchase the same product the infrastructure provider chose.n  G When the analysis was done, DECmessageQ beat IBM MQ series on technicalaH merit and breadth of platform support. However IBM MQ Series was the oneL chosen for implementation because IBM pointed to advertising they were doingI for the product, took the key decision makers to play golf, and said thatsJ they were committed to the product through thick and thin. Digital did notK 'sell' their product to those who were making the decision and did not seem  committed to it.  F Thus several hundred MQ Series licenses were sold by IBM in 1994-95 toJ customers of this particular infrastructure provider. Most (about 85%) areH still in use today, and all have been under maintenace contract with IBMC since day 1. Not a bad source of revenue for a little advertising &t< marketing effort and telling the customer the 'right thing'.  I How do I know all this? I was involved in the original study and analysisIE and am intimately familiar with many of the infrastructure provider's 2 customers technical environments and applications.   Draw your own parallels.  D HP suffers from the same dirty little secret that Digital did: greatH products (many of Digital-heritage) that nobody knows about because theyK aren't advertised at the product level - too much 'warm and fuzzy - we're a J great company to deal with' advertising and none of 'this specific product% will solve your problem' advertising.@  L HP? Oh, aren't they the company that just makes printers and digital camerasJ and multimedia PC's? We better go talk to a company that makes servers big" enough for our needs - IBM or Sun.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 03 May 2004 09:44:20 +0200(9 From: Jan-Erik =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=F6derholm?= <aaa@aaa.com>)Y Subject: Re: non-system but priviledged account OK for installing layered products? produn' Message-ID: <4095F854.2BF59997@aaa.com>b   "David J. Dachtera" wrote: > @ > I was given to understand that MQseries *IS* DECmessageq, someH > generations removed, just as SLS is descended from an early version of
 > TapeSys.   Not at all !!!  C DECmessageq is the well known (to us) product built by Digital, nowh9 owned by BEA under the name BEA MessageQ (but last time It5 looked all logicals and files still was called DMQ*).t  5 MQ Series is a similar product developed by IBM, withh9 client interfaces for VMS (and a lot of other platforms).I  : IMHO, DMQ is a technical superior product, but with a less market presens today.   	 Jan-Erik.n   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2004 04:38:25 -0700N. From: alexdaniels@themail.co.uk (Alex Daniels)= Subject: Secure Web Server Version 2.0 available for downloade= Message-ID: <9f7f13a8.0405030338.27b1daab@posting.google.com>e  ; >From: Alex Daniels (alexdanielsnospamthanks@themail.co.uk) C >Subject: Re: Secure Web Server Version 2.0 available for download a >Date: 2004-01-07 05:40:12 PST V > M >"David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net> wrote in message  3 >news:<3FFB766F.DE20B8A5@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net>...  > Mark Berryman wrote: > >  > > Sue Skonetski wrote:C > > > Announcing HP Secure Web Server Version 2.0 for OpenVMS Alpha C > > > -------------------------------------------------------------t > > > K > > > Hewlett-Packard is pleased to announce the availability of Secure Web H > > > Server (SWS)2.0. SWS 2.0 is based on Apache 2.0.47 from the ApacheI > > > Software Foundation. This is the first version of Apache to support   > > > the IPv6 network protocol. > > > $ > > > Minimum software requirements: > > >s. > > >     OpenVMS 7.3-1 (with latest CRTL ECO)9 > > >     ODS-5 for installation and document directoriesy > > >     TCP/IP 5.3 > > % > > and this, from the release notes:t > > I > > "The Secure Web Server Version 2.0 kit requires that all served filess! > > must be in Stream_LF format."  > > 	 > > WHY?!s > > J > > CSWS V1.3 happily served any format file.  The C RTL will happily readL > > any RMS format.  Why this restriction?  Please note that this means thatK > > the V2.0 webserver is no longer able to serve the VMS documentation CDs 9 > > since the HTML files are in "variable length" format.i > > L > > C'mon, folks.  Isn't this carrying Unix compatibility a wee bit too far? > > D > >I'd be the last to know, but my first guess would be an effort to > >minimize the porting effort.  >nD >The stream_lf restriction is a pain.. There is however a bit of DCL" >included to convert to stream_lf 4 >apache$common:[000000]APACHE$CONVERT_STREAMLF.COM;1 >aF >It would be nice if took a specific file rather than just a directory >as a param though.. >nD >Also I am quite surpised this is being shipped without a compatable& >version of CSWS_PERL being available.   -------------------------t  D And now it is released just four months later.. I must learn to be a bit more patient...     @ CSWS_PERL Version 2.0 and Perl 5.6-1 ECO 3 for OpenVMS Alpha are. available for download from the CSWS web site:  @ http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/products/ips/apache/csws.html     E CSWS_PERL Version 2.0 provides mod_perl support for Secure Web Servere (CSWS) Version 2.0.t     Alex   ------------------------------  * Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 12:16:25 +0000 (UTC) From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.ukA Subject: Re: Secure Web Server Version 2.0 available for downloadb) Message-ID: <c75d6p$sfr$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>   n In article <9f7f13a8.0405030338.27b1daab@posting.google.com>, alexdaniels@themail.co.uk (Alex Daniels) writes:< >>From: Alex Daniels (alexdanielsnospamthanks@themail.co.uk)D >>Subject: Re: Secure Web Server Version 2.0 available for download   >>Date: 2004-01-07 05:40:12 PST  >> rN >>"David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net> wrote in message 4 >>news:<3FFB766F.DE20B8A5@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net>... >> Mark Berryman wrote:A >> > - >> > Sue Skonetski wrote:iD >> > > Announcing HP Secure Web Server Version 2.0 for OpenVMS AlphaD >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------- >> > >L >> > > Hewlett-Packard is pleased to announce the availability of Secure WebI >> > > Server (SWS)2.0. SWS 2.0 is based on Apache 2.0.47 from the ApacheaJ >> > > Software Foundation. This is the first version of Apache to support! >> > > the IPv6 network protocol.4 >> > >% >> > > Minimum software requirements:e >> > >/ >> > >     OpenVMS 7.3-1 (with latest CRTL ECO)m: >> > >     ODS-5 for installation and document directories >> > >     TCP/IP 5.3n >> >  & >> > and this, from the release notes: >> > sJ >> > "The Secure Web Server Version 2.0 kit requires that all served files" >> > must be in Stream_LF format." >> > I
 >> > WHY?! >> > tK >> > CSWS V1.3 happily served any format file.  The C RTL will happily readfM >> > any RMS format.  Why this restriction?  Please note that this means thataL >> > the V2.0 webserver is no longer able to serve the VMS documentation CDs: >> > since the HTML files are in "variable length" format. >> > .M >> > C'mon, folks.  Isn't this carrying Unix compatibility a wee bit too far?c >> >E >> >I'd be the last to know, but my first guess would be an effort to.  >> >minimize the porting effort. >>E >>The stream_lf restriction is a pain.. There is however a bit of DCLr# >>included to convert to stream_lf  5 >>apache$common:[000000]APACHE$CONVERT_STREAMLF.COM;1a >>G >>It would be nice if took a specific file rather than just a directory  >>as a param though..O >>E >>Also I am quite surpised this is being shipped without a compatable ' >>version of CSWS_PERL being available.e >  >------------------------- > E >And now it is released just four months later.. I must learn to be al >bit more patient... >f >hA >CSWS_PERL Version 2.0 and Perl 5.6-1 ECO 3 for OpenVMS Alpha are./ >available for download from the CSWS web site:m >OA >http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/products/ips/apache/csws.html r >h >iF >CSWS_PERL Version 2.0 provides mod_perl support for Secure Web Server >(CSWS) Version 2.0. >e! Why such an old version of Perl ?e  A Perl 5.8-4 has just been released. Perl 5.6-1 was first released v 8th Apr 2001 :-   7 http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl5.porters/33823     J Any idea yet when we are likely to have support for non stream_lf files in SWS 2.0.K Fixing this should be a major priority since with this current restriction  . SWS 2.0 is useless to large numbers of people.  w  
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University           >t >Alexi   ------------------------------  $ Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 09:39:47 -0400* From: Kenneth.Robinson@VerizonWireless.comA Subject: RE: Secure Web Server Version 2.0 available for downloadp" Message-ID: <6205076@MVB.SAIC.COM>   David Webb wrote in part:L  K >Any idea yet when we are likely to have support for non stream_lf files in  SWS 2.0.K >Fixing this should be a major priority since with this current restrictionr' SWS 2.0 is useless to large numbers of p >people.  @ I just discovered an interesting work around for this problem...  0 Install PHP along with SWS 2.0. Then in the fileG APACHE$COMMON:[CONF]MOD_PHP.CONF, add ".html .htm" to the line "AddTypet application/x-httpd-php".s  I This causes the PHP processor to process the HTML files first (it doesn'tsG care what format the files are in) before passing them on to the Apache1 server.P  L I did a small test and it worked fine.  You don't have to change your source
 files at all.    Ken Robinson   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2004 11:32:13 -0600L- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) . Subject: Re: SEVMS (was: how to turn LinuX...)3 Message-ID: <TxbVrkEsGYFB@eisner.encompasserve.org>   h In article <c75m1p$rh5$1@news.wplus.net>, "Alex Daniels" <AlexNOSPAMTHANKSDaniels@themail.co.uk> writes:  N > If we are talking about SEVMS, we should note it is NOT being ported to I64,G > hey its not like VMS needs any more customers let alone the big sitese > who would buy it..  / Do you know of any big sites who would buy it ?e  G As a security geek, I find it fascinating, but that is different from ah business case.  G US DoD purchases these days seem to be tied to DII-COE, a.k.a. "SolaristC emulation", which has nothing to do with mandatory access controls.b   ------------------------------  * Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 17:18:09 +0000 (UTC)P From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply). Subject: Re: SEVMS (was: how to turn LinuX...)$ Message-ID: <c75ush$mig$1@online.de>  3 In article <TxbVrkEsGYFB@eisner.encompasserve.org>,w0 Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:   P > > If we are talking about SEVMS, we should note it is NOT being ported to I64,I > > hey its not like VMS needs any more customers let alone the big sites  > > who would buy it.. > 1 > Do you know of any big sites who would buy it ?" > I > As a security geek, I find it fascinating, but that is different from a  > business case.  E I believe that someone who knows the numbers mentioned here once how d- many SEVMS systems had sold.  It wasn't many.e  ; IIRC, the emphasis is not on "hacker can't break in" but ongE "higher-priviledged user can't easily send MAIL to lower-priviledged t user" and so on.   ------------------------------   Date: 3 May 2004 10:13:35 -0700k& From: dorrt@sutterhealth.org (tr dorr) Subject: T4 and TLViz = Message-ID: <59b7bbb8.0405030913.7b8189d2@posting.google.com>o  ? In the use of T4 HP engineering uses TLViz and CSVPNG which aret graphic converters. 0 Does anyone know where to find TLViz and CSVPNG?> Evidently HP engineering uses TLViz when doing a Health Check.B Can anyone in HP engineering provide information on how to get the# graphic utilities TLViz and CSVPNG?u Thanks,i Tomn   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2004.245 ************************