1 INFO-VAX	Fri, 05 May 2006	Volume 2006 : Issue 248       Contents:' Alpha ds20 serial console going to com2 + Re: Alpha ds20 serial console going to com2 8 Re: Automatically create a default DEC$DISLAY at startup8 Re: DCL versus Unix CLIs, was: Re: File output like Unix Re: decnet vs decnet over IP, Re: DECTerm creation of DECW$DISPLAY logical Re: DS10L SCSI Cable) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) RE: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! ) Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! 5 Re: Miltu-core CPUs, threads vs AST driven approaches 5 Re: Miltu-core CPUs, threads vs AST driven approaches 5 Re: Miltu-core CPUs, threads vs AST driven approaches 5 Re: Miltu-core CPUs, threads vs AST driven approaches 5 Re: Miltu-core CPUs, threads vs AST driven approaches  Re: Nemonix Fast Ethernet Card& Re: OpenVMS Management Station (3.2-d) Protecting windows from malware  Re: to bob@instantwhip Re: X windows vulnerability   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------   Date: 4 May 2006 12:03:24 -0700 ' From: "syslost" <wm.reynolds@gmail.com> 0 Subject: Alpha ds20 serial console going to com2C Message-ID: <1146769404.012761.287410@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   
 Alpha ds20 Console serial SRM  v6.2-1  PALcode: vms v1.96-77 	 VMS 7.3-1   E This is one of those cases where the server worked until it was moved  to another building.  C Now, when I power up the ds20, the console output goes to com2 (s/b > com1).  When I try to boot the system, it hangs at "jumping toF bootstrap code".  I have to powercycle the server from the front panal$ switches to get the >>> prompt back.  2 Any ideas on how/why the console is going to com2?   Here's the boot screen:   ! P00>>>b -fl 1,1 dkb400.4.0.2001.1 # (boot dkb400.4.0.2001.1 -flags 1,1) 2 block 0 of dkb400.4.0.2001.1 is a valid boot block* reading 1022 blocks from dkb400.4.0.2001.1 bootstrap code read inA base =3D 200000, image_start =3D 0, image_bytes =3D 7fc00(523264)  initializing HWRPB at 2000# initializing page table at 3ff52000  initializing machine state# setting affinity to the primary CPU  jumping to bootstrap code    And show config: P00>>>show config "                         Test DS20B   SRM Console:    V6.2-1E PALcode:        OpenVMS PALcode V1.96-77, Tru64 UNIX PALcode V1.90-72   
 ProcessorsD CPU 0           Alpha EV6 pass 2.3 500 MHz      SROM Revision: V1.82!                 Bcache size: 4 MB   
 Core Logic( Cchip           DECchip 21272-CA Rev 2.1( Dchip           DECchip 21272-DA Rev 2.0( Pchip 0         DECchip 21272-EA Rev 2.2( Pchip 1         DECchip 21272-EA Rev 2.2   TIG             Rev 4.14 Arbiter         Rev 2.10 (0x1)   MEMORY    Array #       Size     Base Addr  -------    ----------  ---------     0         512 MB    000000000     1         512 MB    020000000   Total Bad Pages =3D 0 ! Total Good Memory =3D 1024 MBytes      PCI Hose 00 &      Bus 00  Slot 05/0: Cypress 82C693F                                                          Bridge to Bus 1, ISA*      Bus 00  Slot 05/1: Cypress 82C693 IDE0                                    dqa.0.0.105.0  *      Bus 00  Slot 05/2: Cypress 82C693 IDE0                                    dqb.0.1.205.0  *      Bus 00  Slot 05/3: Cypress 82C693 USB    $      Bus 00  Slot 07: DEC PowerStorm/                                    vga0.0.0.7.0         Bus 00  Slot 08: DEC KZPSA F                                    pkd0.7.0.8.0          SCSI Bus ID 7     PCI Hose 01 &      Bus 00  Slot 07: DECchip 21152-AAF                                                          Bridge to Bus 2, PCI$      Bus 00  Slot 08: QLogic ISP10x0F                                    pkc0.6.0.8.1          SCSI Bus ID 6  &      Bus 00  Slot 09: DECchip 21140-AA/                                    ewb0.0.0.9.1  00-00-F8-03-D4-ED        Bus 02  Slot 00: NCR 53C875F                                    pka0.7.0.2000.1       SCSI Bus ID 7  ?                                    dka400.4.0.2000.1      RRD47          Bus 02  Slot 01: NCR 53C875F                                    pkb0.6.0.2001.1       SCSI Bus ID 6  B                                    dkb0.0.0.2001.1        RZ2DD-LS  B                                    dkb100.1.0.2001.1      RZ1CF-CF  B                                    dkb200.2.0.2001.1      RZ2DD-LS  B                                    dkb300.3.0.2001.1      RZ2DD-LS  B                                    dkb400.4.0.2001.1      RZ2DD-LS  B                                    dkb500.5.0.2001.1      RZ2DD-LS  1      Bus 02  Slot 02: DE500-AA Network Controller 2                                    ewa0.0.0.2002.1 00-06-2B-00-72-78      ISA C Slot    Device  Name            Type         Enabled  BaseAddr  IRQ  DMA  0 B         0       MOUSE           Embedded        Yes     60      12A         1       KBD             Embedded        Yes     60      1 A         2       COM1            Embedded        Yes     3f8     4 A         3       COM2            Embedded        Yes     2f8     3 A         4       LPT1            Embedded        Yes     3bc     7 A         5       FLOPPY          Embedded        Yes     3f0     6  2    P00>>>   show fru@ (one of the other ds20 shows this same line for the motherboard) P00>>>show fruG FRUname         E  Part#              Serial#    Model/Other Alias/Misc < SMB0            00 ??????????????????  @????_____ ??????????
 ??????????6 SMB0.CPU0       00 54-24758-03         NI96070661 =D4?  8 SMB0.CPU0.FAN   00 70-33599-01        -          CPU Fan  ! SMB0.PCI0       00 DEC PowerStorm    SMB0.PCI1       00 DEC KZPSA  # SMB0.PCI3       00 DECchip 21152-AA   ! SMB0.PCI4       00 QLogic ISP10x0   # SMB0.PCI5       00 DECchip 21140-AA    SMB0.DIMM0      00   SMB0.DIMM1      00   SMB0.DIMM2      00   SMB0.DIMM3      00   SMB0.DIMM4      00   SMB0.DIMM5      00   SMB0.DIMM6      00   SMB0.DIMM7      00  C SFM             00 54-25580-01        -          SvrMgmt     Compaq   C PWR0            00 H7899-AA           -          Power       Compaq   C FAN1            00 70-31351-01        -          System Fan  Compaq      =20  P00>>>   ------------------------------  $ Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 20:36:06 -0400* From: "d b turner" <dbturner@islandco.com>4 Subject: Re: Alpha ds20 serial console going to com28 Message-ID: <_5x6g.12370$Sl4.305@bignews1.bellsouth.net>   Check     1) keyboard is working correctly, 2) Keyboard and mouse are in the right ports* 3) Keyboard matches the keyboard listed in >>>show kbd_hardware_type ' My guess is the keyboard is flaking out   J Funnily enough, in the past 3 weeks we have had customers call telling us J they need to buy a new system and in my stupidity (and perhaps honesty) I ! tell them to check their keyboard . The problem seems to be the LK461-A2 and LK46W$ They seem to die after about 3 years  ( The LK411 seems to be built a lot better    J Oh by the way, for LK411, 461 and LK46W the kbd_type in the srm should be  lk411 * FOr a PC style keyboard it should be PCXAL     David     3 "syslost" <wm.reynolds@gmail.com> wrote in message  = news:1146769404.012761.287410@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... 
 Alpha ds20 Console serial SRM  v6.2-1  PALcode: vms v1.96-77 	 VMS 7.3-1   E This is one of those cases where the server worked until it was moved  to another building.  C Now, when I power up the ds20, the console output goes to com2 (s/b > com1).  When I try to boot the system, it hangs at "jumping toF bootstrap code".  I have to powercycle the server from the front panal$ switches to get the >>> prompt back.  2 Any ideas on how/why the console is going to com2?   Here's the boot screen:   ! P00>>>b -fl 1,1 dkb400.4.0.2001.1 # (boot dkb400.4.0.2001.1 -flags 1,1) 2 block 0 of dkb400.4.0.2001.1 is a valid boot block* reading 1022 blocks from dkb400.4.0.2001.1 bootstrap code read in; base = 200000, image_start = 0, image_bytes = 7fc00(523264)  initializing HWRPB at 2000# initializing page table at 3ff52000  initializing machine state# setting affinity to the primary CPU  jumping to bootstrap code    And show config: P00>>>show config "                         Test DS20B   SRM Console:    V6.2-1E PALcode:        OpenVMS PALcode V1.96-77, Tru64 UNIX PALcode V1.90-72   
 ProcessorsD CPU 0           Alpha EV6 pass 2.3 500 MHz      SROM Revision: V1.82!                 Bcache size: 4 MB   
 Core Logic( Cchip           DECchip 21272-CA Rev 2.1( Dchip           DECchip 21272-DA Rev 2.0( Pchip 0         DECchip 21272-EA Rev 2.2( Pchip 1         DECchip 21272-EA Rev 2.2   TIG             Rev 4.14 Arbiter         Rev 2.10 (0x1)   MEMORY    Array #       Size     Base Addr  -------    ----------  ---------     0         512 MB    000000000     1         512 MB    020000000   Total Bad Pages = 0  Total Good Memory = 1024 MBytes      PCI Hose 00 &      Bus 00  Slot 05/0: Cypress 82C693F                                                          Bridge to Bus 1, ISA*      Bus 00  Slot 05/1: Cypress 82C693 IDE0                                    dqa.0.0.105.0  *      Bus 00  Slot 05/2: Cypress 82C693 IDE0                                    dqb.0.1.205.0  *      Bus 00  Slot 05/3: Cypress 82C693 USB    $      Bus 00  Slot 07: DEC PowerStorm/                                    vga0.0.0.7.0         Bus 00  Slot 08: DEC KZPSA F                                    pkd0.7.0.8.0          SCSI Bus ID 7     PCI Hose 01 &      Bus 00  Slot 07: DECchip 21152-AAF                                                          Bridge to Bus 2, PCI$      Bus 00  Slot 08: QLogic ISP10x0F                                    pkc0.6.0.8.1          SCSI Bus ID 6  &      Bus 00  Slot 09: DECchip 21140-AA/                                    ewb0.0.0.9.1  00-00-F8-03-D4-ED        Bus 02  Slot 00: NCR 53C875F                                    pka0.7.0.2000.1       SCSI Bus ID 7  ?                                    dka400.4.0.2000.1      RRD47          Bus 02  Slot 01: NCR 53C875F                                    pkb0.6.0.2001.1       SCSI Bus ID 6  B                                    dkb0.0.0.2001.1        RZ2DD-LS  B                                    dkb100.1.0.2001.1      RZ1CF-CF  B                                    dkb200.2.0.2001.1      RZ2DD-LS  B                                    dkb300.3.0.2001.1      RZ2DD-LS  B                                    dkb400.4.0.2001.1      RZ2DD-LS  B                                    dkb500.5.0.2001.1      RZ2DD-LS  1      Bus 02  Slot 02: DE500-AA Network Controller 2                                    ewa0.0.0.2002.1 00-06-2B-00-72-78      ISA C Slot    Device  Name            Type         Enabled  BaseAddr  IRQ  DMA  0 B         0       MOUSE           Embedded        Yes     60      12A         1       KBD             Embedded        Yes     60      1 A         2       COM1            Embedded        Yes     3f8     4 A         3       COM2            Embedded        Yes     2f8     3 A         4       LPT1            Embedded        Yes     3bc     7 A         5       FLOPPY          Embedded        Yes     3f0     6  2    P00>>>   show fru@ (one of the other ds20 shows this same line for the motherboard) P00>>>show fruG FRUname         E  Part#              Serial#    Model/Other Alias/Misc < SMB0            00 ??????????????????  @????_____ ??????????
 ??????????4 SMB0.CPU0       00 54-24758-03         NI96070661 ?  8 SMB0.CPU0.FAN   00 70-33599-01        -          CPU Fan  ! SMB0.PCI0       00 DEC PowerStorm    SMB0.PCI1       00 DEC KZPSA  # SMB0.PCI3       00 DECchip 21152-AA   ! SMB0.PCI4       00 QLogic ISP10x0   # SMB0.PCI5       00 DECchip 21140-AA    SMB0.DIMM0      00   SMB0.DIMM1      00   SMB0.DIMM2      00   SMB0.DIMM3      00   SMB0.DIMM4      00   SMB0.DIMM5      00   SMB0.DIMM6      00   SMB0.DIMM7      00  C SFM             00 54-25580-01        -          SvrMgmt     Compaq   C PWR0            00 H7899-AA           -          Power       Compaq   C FAN1            00 70-31351-01        -          System Fan  Compaq    P00>>>   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 20:57:46 -0500 @ From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net>A Subject: Re: Automatically create a default DEC$DISLAY at startup 6 Message-ID: <445AB11A.72C740E7@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net>   "Bart.Zorn@gmail.com" wrote: > 2 > Several procedures in SYS$STARTUP:DECW*.COM use: > + > f$device("*","workstation","decw_output")   H I'm wondering where you found the "decw_output" keyword. I don't find it( in HELP for either F$DEVICE or F$GETDVI.   --   David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  & Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page! http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/   ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/   " Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/   ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: " http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/   ------------------------------  * Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 21:57:12 +0000 (UTC)1 From: legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) A Subject: Re: DCL versus Unix CLIs, was: Re: File output like Unix , Message-ID: <e3dtbo$hdc$2@news.xmission.com>  / [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]   C "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> spake the secret code 6 <UomdnWvzm4cBn8fZnZ2dnUVZ_sednZ2d@comcast.com> thusly:  & >>>That's certainly true of gcc. [...] >>   >> No, its not true of gcc.  >  >Suggest you RTFM! [...]  8 I already read it and posted an example of how to do it.   "Physician, heal thyself." --  E "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline"-- code samples, sample chapter, FAQ: 3           <http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/> ( 	    Pilgrimage: Utah's annual demoparty,                <http://pilgrimage.scene.org>   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 14:55:13 -0400 + From: Steve Matzura <number6@speakeasy.net> % Subject: Re: decnet vs decnet over IP 8 Message-ID: <74jk5251d39e8osnk689sqst4rp12i45rk@4ax.com>  3 On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 08:52:47 +0800, "Richard Maher" $ <maher_rj@hotspamnotmail.com> wrote:  : >> This emulates DECnet from the application point of view > L >Interesting. How transparent is it? Does it relace the _NET: driver on VMS?  C Transparency is, to the best of my five-year knowledge working with C it, total.  IP is the transport layer (configured in the "Configure D Transports" section of NET$CONFIGURE), so how it gets there is belowC your knowledge and control as far as the application goes.  You use F either the NSP or the OSI transport, and if you use the OSI transport,C you get an additional question about whether you want to run DECnet B application over that transport (instead of NSP). HP won't certifyE that certain things working over DECnet-over-IP (such as DECnet/SNA), B but your basic SET HOST and OPEN nodename"::"access-control-string stuff works great.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 21:12:40 -0500 @ From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net>5 Subject: Re: DECTerm creation of DECW$DISPLAY logical 6 Message-ID: <445AB498.2E22EEDA@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net>   JF Mezei wrote:  >  > on NODE1:  > 1 > $SET DISPLAY/CREATE/TRANSPORT=DECNET/NODE=NODE2 ! > $CREATE/TERM/DETACH/NOLOGGED_IN  > M > This causes a decterm window to pop up on NODE2, with the Username: prompt.  > F > You login, and once at the $ prompt, SHOW LOG DECW$DISPLAY shows the/ > logical exists in exec mode in the job table.  > % > Who creates that logical and when ?  > J > Since, at the time the DECTERM window is created, you are not yet loggedE > in, can decterm software predefine a logical for a job that doesn't 	 > exist ?   2 Well, actually yes it does. You'll find it in SHOW< USERS/INTERACTIVE/FULL showing with a username of "<login>".  B > Or is it a case of the login process morphing into your eventualH > process, which means that DECTERM, when creating the login process canJ > predefine the logical which survives through the login process onto your, > eventual process under your own username ? > J > Or does DECTERM magically intervene when it notices you have succesfullyG > logged in and inserts the DECW$DISPLAY logical behind the scenes into  > your job logical table ?  # Well, not DECTERM, rather LOGINOUT.    --   David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  & Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page! http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/   ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/   " Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/   ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: " http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/   ------------------------------  $ Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 20:37:17 -0400* From: "d b turner" <dbturner@islandco.com> Subject: Re: DS10L SCSI Cable 9 Message-ID: <57x6g.12372$Sl4.2287@bignews1.bellsouth.net>   1 We made some cables for Bob at instant whip foods   . We could do one for $45+$20 for the terminator   David - <stuie_norris@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message  < news:1146740854.361919.34500@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com... > Hi Group,  > C > Just picked up a cheap KZPCM-DA SCSI card to replace the crap IDE F > controller on my hobbyist DS10L.  The DS10L works perfectly with the) > KZPCM-DA and a Compaq 36 Gb SCSI drive.  > H > Went to close the case and found that you need a special SCSI cable to) > fit the KZPCM-DA inside the DS10L case.  > F > Checked out the DS10L Technical specification and it mentions a SCSI > cable 3X-BN51A-SD. > F > Anyone know what the connector is I need to buy to allow me to closeB > the case on my DS10L when I am using my new SCSI card and drive. >  > Thanks >  > Stuart >    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 19:54:31 +0200 / From: Paul Sture <paul.sture.nospam@hispeed.ch> 2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!: Message-ID: <d89a$445a3fd8$50db5015$13712@news.hispeed.ch>   Michael D. Ober wrote: >   L > OK - it was late and I was tired, so I don't remember which station or the1 > name of the professor.  However, take a look at K > http://secunia.com/advisories/19686/ for a Mac virus that doesn't require % > the user enter the system password.  >   ; That article mentions "Multiple Potential Vulnerabilities".   - It does not say that a virus actually exists.    ------------------------------  $ Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 14:29:38 -0400' From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> 2 Subject: RE: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!T Message-ID: <FA60F2C4B72A584DBFC6091F6A2B8684013AC028@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>   > -----Original Message-----B > From: Michael D. Ober [mailto:"obermd."@.alum.mit.edu.nospam]=20 > Sent: May 4, 2006 9:04 AM  > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com 4 > Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses! >=20 > =20  >=20: > "Karsten Nyblad" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message9 > news:4459cd57$0$60786$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk...  > > Bob Koehler wrote: > > > In article=20 < > <445852b9$0$67263$157c6196@dreader2.cybercity.dk>, Karsten' > Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam> writes:  > > >  > > >>Michael D. Ober wrote: > > >>G > > >>>If the MacIntosh becomes more common, it's security by obscurity 
 > security > > >>>model will fail.  > > >>H > > >>The same thing could be said about VMS.  OS X is based on the MACH< > > >>kernel, where most of the processing takes place in=20 > processes that do < > > >>not have access to more than they need.  VMS is not=20 > superior by design@ > > >>to OS X when it comes to security.  VMS might be better=20 > coded and might ? > > >>have better coding standards, but it is naive to think=20  > that there are no C > > >>security bugs hidden in the millions of lines of code of VMS.  > > >  > > > B > > >   VMS does notrely on security by obscurity.  That's FUD.=20 >  VMS _is_ B > > >   superior by design than any UNIX based OS.  Sure, there=20 > might be a bugA > > >   in there somewhere but it IS the design that makes the=20 
 > difference.  > > > A > > You did not get my point.  OS X does not relay on security=20  > by obscurity9 > > either.  Thus it is also FUD to claim that OS X does.  > >  >=20A > When an OS has as little market share as OS X has had in the=20  > past, for all = > practical purposes it is obscure to virus writers.  They=20  > simply won't target > > it because they can't make as much havoc or steal as much=20 > with it.  Thus,  > Security By Obscurity. >=20 > Mike.  >=20  * Please .. Lets not be juvenile about this.  C "security by obscurity" is another term similar to "legacy" that is A often used by those that are less informed when they want to make @ derogatory comments about something they know very little about.  @ No vendor plans their security by obscurity, so those that stateA otherwise are those that fall into the bucket of "less informed".   A No vendor makes a platform that is 100% secure - heck, just watch F Mission Impossible II movie. Yes, I know it's a movie, but you can see	 my point.   7 Are some platforms inherently more secure by design?=20    Absolutely.   C Do the platforms that are more secure have the same market share as % those that are less secure by design?   E Perhaps not, but design and market share are two different topics, so ) please do not mix the two. Stay focussed.   D The fact is that there are some platforms that are inherently better@ designed from a base security perspective. And while less secureE platforms can be made more secure with additional labour, attachments D and wrapping etc, when kernel or some other base security issues areE constantly being uncovered in that base design, all of the wrappings, E additional effort to retest applications etc need to be re-done after  the patch is applied.   G Now, if this security issue on less secure platforms were an occasional F incident, then the impact to Customers would be minimal. However, when6 these base security issues become a monthly occurrenceA (Windows/Linux/others), then this really is a big opportunity for H hackers as they know that when companies have hundreds of these servers,D the chance of these servers being up to date with patches is slim to none.   B As a recent post indicated, the reason hackers focus on the weakerG platforms is very simple - it is because they can. Being successful and 4 bragging rights is what drives the hacker community.  D An analogy might be to ask the question "why do street crooks attackH corner stores, liquor stores and not go after the bigger banks, casino's etc?"=20  @ Simple - the crooks know they have a much better chance at beingD successful attacking less secure targets than a bank or a casino. OfF course, that is not to say the bank or the casino can not be hit, just: that to do this requires a much more sophisticated attack.  4 HP OpenVMS is like the bigger bank or the casino.=20  : If you want some additional background on this, check out:  8 http://h71028.www7.hp.com/ERC/downloads/4AA0-2896ENW.pdf  : http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/whitepapers/TCS_2004.pdf     Regards   
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant  HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax: 613-591-4477  kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT)=20  4 OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works.   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 19:24:06 GMT > From: andekl_no@saaf_spam.se (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_Ekl=F6f?=)2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!; Message-ID: <1hetzae.12swa2btb4d3tN%andekl_no@saaf_spam.se>   7 "Michael D. Ober" <obermd.@.alum.mit.edu.nospam> wrote:    >   L > OK - it was late and I was tired, so I don't remember which station or the1 > name of the professor.  However, take a look at K > http://secunia.com/advisories/19686/ for a Mac virus that doesn't require % > the user enter the system password.   D As Paul Sture points out, that article does not mention any specificF virus. I also post too late at night sometimes - the results are often quite amusing :-)   C As I had suspected, this was old news. I did some more googling and E found somee "less trimmed" versions of the AP story. If we are talkng E about the same person, which I doubt, it was Benjamin Daines, who was F "hit" by Oompa-Loompa (a.k.a. Leap.A, or Oomp-A) in mid-February - seeD http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/04/30/apple.security.ap/ for reference.B Daines is a British chemical engineer, not a comp sci professor in	 Boulder.    7 Anyway, this is also the case the OP was referring to.    H From http://www.ambrosiasw.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=102379 you can read the following:   B You cannot be infected by this unless you do all of the following:  < 1) Are somehow sent (via email, iChat, etc.) or download the "latestpics.tgz" file   , 2) Double-click on the file to decompress it  2 3) Double-click on the resulting file to "open" it  F ...and then for non-Admin users, it fails to infect most applications.  H You *cannot* simply "catch" the virus. Even if someone does send you theF "latestpics.tgz" file, you cannot be infected unless you unarchive the file, and then open it.   H In my book that constitutes, not a virus, not even a worm, but a Trojan.% There's more at the Ambosia board ...    --  5 I recommend Macs to my friends, and Windows machines  . to those whom I don't mind billing by the hour   ------------------------------  $ Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 15:15:02 -06006 From: "Michael D. Ober" <obermd.@.alum.mit.edu.nospam>2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!/ Message-ID: <P7u6g.43$7s.10120@news.uswest.net>      B Our local news actually interviewed and had him on the idiot tube.   Mike.   8 "Anders Eklf" <andekl_no@saaf_spam.se> wrote in message5 news:1hetzae.12swa2btb4d3tN%andekl_no@saaf_spam.se...  > 9 > "Michael D. Ober" <obermd.@.alum.mit.edu.nospam> wrote:  >  > > J > > OK - it was late and I was tired, so I don't remember which station or the 3 > > name of the professor.  However, take a look at E > > http://secunia.com/advisories/19686/ for a Mac virus that doesn't  require ' > > the user enter the system password.  > F > As Paul Sture points out, that article does not mention any specificH > virus. I also post too late at night sometimes - the results are often > quite amusing :-)  > E > As I had suspected, this was old news. I did some more googling and G > found somee "less trimmed" versions of the AP story. If we are talkng G > about the same person, which I doubt, it was Benjamin Daines, who was H > "hit" by Oompa-Loompa (a.k.a. Leap.A, or Oomp-A) in mid-February - seeF > http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/04/30/apple.security.ap/ for reference.D > Daines is a British chemical engineer, not a comp sci professor in
 > Boulder. > 8 > Anyway, this is also the case the OP was referring to. > J > From http://www.ambrosiasw.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=102379 you can > read the following:  > D > You cannot be infected by this unless you do all of the following: > > > 1) Are somehow sent (via email, iChat, etc.) or download the > "latestpics.tgz" file  > . > 2) Double-click on the file to decompress it > 4 > 3) Double-click on the resulting file to "open" it > H > ...and then for non-Admin users, it fails to infect most applications. > J > You *cannot* simply "catch" the virus. Even if someone does send you theH > "latestpics.tgz" file, you cannot be infected unless you unarchive the > file, and then open it.  > J > In my book that constitutes, not a virus, not even a worm, but a Trojan.' > There's more at the Ambosia board ...  >  > --  6 > I recommend Macs to my friends, and Windows machines0 > to those whom I don't mind billing by the hour >    ------------------------------  * Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 22:01:24 +0000 (UTC)1 From: legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) 2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!, Message-ID: <e3dtjk$hdc$3@news.xmission.com>  / [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]   2 GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> spake the secret code6 <A5-dnaHujt8gqcTZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@bresnan.com> thusly:   >Richard wrote: 2 >> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup] >>  5 >> GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> spake the secret code 9 >> <8aqdnYdS96KLf8XZnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@bresnan.com> thusly:  >>   >>  G >>>Probably doesn't even know that his machine is likely a member of a   >>>spam-bot ring.  >>   >>  F >> Oh please.  Now you're just flailing and making wild claims becauseE >> you find it hard to believe that with a few simple precautions you F >> don't need AV software on a windows box.  Hell, I didn't even run a" >> firewall until a few years ago. > H >Wild claims??  Tell that to the Seattle area hospital complex that got 6 >infected and turned most of their PCs into spam-bots.  J Now where did I say that I was running the PCs in a Seattle area hospital?  D Yes, your claims are wild stuff you're making up about *my* PC.  I'm9 only talking about my PC, not the entirety of all Windows  installations everywhere.   " >Then you've been very very lucky.  E No, I've simply applied a few general and simple precautions to how I 
 use my PC. --  E "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline"-- code samples, sample chapter, FAQ: 3           <http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/> ( 	    Pilgrimage: Utah's annual demoparty,                <http://pilgrimage.scene.org>   ------------------------------  * Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 22:02:13 +0000 (UTC)1 From: legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) 2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!, Message-ID: <e3dtl5$hdc$4@news.xmission.com>  / [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]   2 GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> spake the secret code6 <A5-dnaDujt-yqMTZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@bresnan.com> thusly:   >Richard wrote:   H >> Email is the main transmission vector for Windows malware.  I haven't$ >> ever used my PC as a mail reader. > 4 >That isn't the only place that is vulnerable. [...]  @ Non sequitor.  I didn't say that email was the only transmission vector.  --  E "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline"-- code samples, sample chapter, FAQ: 3           <http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/> ( 	    Pilgrimage: Utah's annual demoparty,                <http://pilgrimage.scene.org>   ------------------------------  * Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 22:03:24 +0000 (UTC)1 From: legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) 2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!, Message-ID: <e3dtnc$hdc$5@news.xmission.com>  / [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]   ; Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam> spake the secret code 9 <4459d104$0$60786$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk> thusly:    >GreyCloud wrote:  >> Richard wrote: I >>> I haven't run any AV software on any of my Windows boxes for 13 years ' >>> and have never been hit by a virus.  >>   >>  J >> That one I don't believe.  As soon as I moved and had to use a dial up 4 >> ISP, I got hit within 5 minutes of being on line. > ; >Many modems include a router with NAT functionality, [...]   9 True, but I didn't have NAT until I bought a linksys WAP.   A I ran for many years without NAT or a firewall, probably up until  around 2002. --  E "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline"-- code samples, sample chapter, FAQ: 3           <http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/> ( 	    Pilgrimage: Utah's annual demoparty,                <http://pilgrimage.scene.org>   ------------------------------  * Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 22:06:59 +0000 (UTC)1 From: legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) 2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!, Message-ID: <e3dtu3$hdc$6@news.xmission.com>  / [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]   2 GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> spake the secret code, <NMednVAiV97-q8TZRVn-qg@bresnan.com> thusly:   >Richard wrote:  > 2 >> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup] >>  5 >> GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> spake the secret code 9 >> <8aqdnYRS96J7fMXZnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@bresnan.com> thusly:  >>   >>   >>>Richard wrote:  >>> 3 >>>>[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]  >>>>6 >>>>GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> spake the secret code: >>>><24idnWy74YxsbMrZnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@bresnan.com> thusly: >>>> >>>> >>>>O >>>>>I still don't run any [Mac] AV software and haven't been hit in two years.  >>>> >>>>I >>>>I haven't run any AV software on any of my Windows boxes for 13 years ' >>>>and have never been hit by a virus.  >>> " >>>That one I don't believe. [...] >>   >>  > >> Making you believe the facts of my life is not my priority. > : >Guffaw!!! Believing in this specious claims is hilarious.  C Again, I am simply telling you the facts about my machine.  You can F attempt to impugn my credibility or you can engage in denial, but none of that is really my concern.   D I'm simply stating my experience as a point of reference.  It really9 isn't that hard to keep your Windows box free of malware.    >Pray tell, ) >why do AV companies profit so well then?   F Go ask them.  They certainly aren't going to tell you that maybe their? product isn't as necessary as their marketing would like you to  believe.    >And why do the courts arrest a G >few that control over a hundred thousand PCs and make them spam bots?    C Non sequitor.  I never denied the existence of spam-bots.  I simply ? said that none of my machines have ever been infected with one.   > To disprove my statement you have to show that my machine *is* infected with a spam-bot.  --  E "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline"-- code samples, sample chapter, FAQ: 3           <http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/> ( 	    Pilgrimage: Utah's annual demoparty,                <http://pilgrimage.scene.org>   ------------------------------  * Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 22:08:16 +0000 (UTC)1 From: legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) 2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!, Message-ID: <e3du0g$hdc$7@news.xmission.com>  / [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]   F "Michael D. Ober" <obermd.@.alum.mit.edu.nospam> spake the secret code) <z1n6g.5$7s.2603@news.uswest.net> thusly:   M >Richard - given that there are viruii and trojans that actively scan for and M >infect vulnerable computers, I would strongly suggest that you pop up to one , >of the AV sites and run their free scanner.  2 I've done it plenty of times -- never had a thing.  ? The people on this thread seem desperate to convince me that my ( machine is infected when I know its not.   Who's in denial here?  --  E "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline"-- code samples, sample chapter, FAQ: 3           <http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/> ( 	    Pilgrimage: Utah's annual demoparty,                <http://pilgrimage.scene.org>   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 16:17:12 -0600 " From: GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com>2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!: Message-ID: <4qednSCPBM_04MfZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@bresnan.com>   Richard wrote:  1 > [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]  > 4 > GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> spake the secret code8 > <A5-dnaDujt-yqMTZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@bresnan.com> thusly: >  >  >>Richard wrote: >  > H >>>Email is the main transmission vector for Windows malware.  I haven't$ >>>ever used my PC as a mail reader. >>5 >>That isn't the only place that is vulnerable. [...]  >  > B > Non sequitor.  I didn't say that email was the only transmission	 > vector.   6 Let's put it another way... Windows isn't that secure.E All too often one will encounter news stories around the world about  3 compromised PCs and other problems that affect PCs.      --   Where are we going?   And why am I in this handbasket?   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 16:18:44 -0600 " From: GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com>2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!: Message-ID: <4qednSOPBM9Z4MfZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@bresnan.com>   Richard wrote:  1 > [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]  > 4 > GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> spake the secret code. > <NMednVAiV97-q8TZRVn-qg@bresnan.com> thusly: >  >  >>Richard wrote: >> >>2 >>>[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup] >>> 5 >>>GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> spake the secret code 9 >>><8aqdnYRS96J7fMXZnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@bresnan.com> thusly:  >>>  >>>  >>>  >>>>Richard wrote: >>>> >>>>4 >>>>>[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup] >>>>> 7 >>>>>GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> spake the secret code ; >>>>><24idnWy74YxsbMrZnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@bresnan.com> thusly:  >>>>>  >>>>>  >>>>>  >>>>> P >>>>>>I still don't run any [Mac] AV software and haven't been hit in two years. >>>>>  >>>>> J >>>>>I haven't run any AV software on any of my Windows boxes for 13 years( >>>>>and have never been hit by a virus. >>>># >>>>That one I don't believe. [...]  >>>  >>> > >>>Making you believe the facts of my life is not my priority. >>; >>Guffaw!!! Believing in this specious claims is hilarious.  >  > E > Again, I am simply telling you the facts about my machine.  You can H > attempt to impugn my credibility or you can engage in denial, but none > of that is really my concern.  > F > I'm simply stating my experience as a point of reference.  It really; > isn't that hard to keep your Windows box free of malware.  >  > 
 >>Pray tell,  * >>why do AV companies profit so well then? >  > H > Go ask them.  They certainly aren't going to tell you that maybe theirA > product isn't as necessary as their marketing would like you to 
 > believe. >  > ! >>And why do the courts arrest a  H >>few that control over a hundred thousand PCs and make them spam bots?  >  > E > Non sequitor.  I never denied the existence of spam-bots.  I simply A > said that none of my machines have ever been infected with one.  > @ > To disprove my statement you have to show that my machine *is* > infected with a spam-bot.   B Sorry, but all of your claims can not be believed considering the ; problems that other users of M$ o/s have had problems with.      --   Where are we going?   And why am I in this handbasket?   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 16:18:59 -0600 " From: GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com>2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!: Message-ID: <4qednSKPBM9J4MfZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@bresnan.com>   Richard wrote:  1 > [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]  > H > "Michael D. Ober" <obermd.@.alum.mit.edu.nospam> spake the secret code+ > <z1n6g.5$7s.2603@news.uswest.net> thusly:  >  > N >>Richard - given that there are viruii and trojans that actively scan for andN >>infect vulnerable computers, I would strongly suggest that you pop up to one- >>of the AV sites and run their free scanner.  >  > 4 > I've done it plenty of times -- never had a thing. > A > The people on this thread seem desperate to convince me that my * > machine is infected when I know its not. >  > Who's in denial here?    Apparently, you are.     --   Where are we going?   And why am I in this handbasket?   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 16:15:31 -0600 " From: GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com>2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!: Message-ID: <4qednSGPBM-Z4MfZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@bresnan.com>   Richard wrote:1 > [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]  > 4 > GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> spake the secret code8 > <A5-dnaHujt8gqcTZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@bresnan.com> thusly: >  >  >>Richard wrote: >>2 >>>[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup] >>> 5 >>>GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> spake the secret code 9 >>><8aqdnYdS96KLf8XZnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@bresnan.com> thusly:  >>>  >>>  >>> H >>>>Probably doesn't even know that his machine is likely a member of a  >>>>spam-bot ring. >>>  >>> F >>>Oh please.  Now you're just flailing and making wild claims becauseE >>>you find it hard to believe that with a few simple precautions you F >>>don't need AV software on a windows box.  Hell, I didn't even run a" >>>firewall until a few years ago. >>I >>Wild claims??  Tell that to the Seattle area hospital complex that got  7 >>infected and turned most of their PCs into spam-bots.  >  > L > Now where did I say that I was running the PCs in a Seattle area hospital?  F The point is that it happens, even to the best of them.  Do you think G that a hospital would hand over their entire complex of computers to a  	 neophyte?    > F > Yes, your claims are wild stuff you're making up about *my* PC.  I'm; > only talking about my PC, not the entirety of all Windows  > installations everywhere.  >  > # >>Then you've been very very lucky.  >  > G > No, I've simply applied a few general and simple precautions to how I  > use my PC.  
 So you claim. I But how do you know that you are not infected with spyware, or even that   your machine is a spam bot? # Most users aren't even aware of it.      --   Where are we going?   And why am I in this handbasket?   ------------------------------  * Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 22:51:31 +0000 (UTC)1 From: legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) 2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!, Message-ID: <e3e0hj$jkp$1@news.xmission.com>  / [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]   2 GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> spake the secret code6 <4qednSGPBM-Z4MfZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@bresnan.com> thusly:   >Richard wrote:   M >> Now where did I say that I was running the PCs in a Seattle area hospital?  > 8 >The point is that it happens, even to the best of them.  F Again, non-sequitor.  I didn't say it *couldn't* happen to me.  I said it *hasn't* happened to me.   H >> No, I've simply applied a few general and simple precautions to how I
 >> use my PC.  >  >So you claim.  @ Yes, and unless you're offering to fly out and do an audit of my/ machine, my claim is all that I can offer here.   > Can you do or say any different about your Windows boxes?  No.  L So why are you calling my reporting of facts about my machine "wild claims"?  I I'm guessing because you're somehow threatened by the idea that a Windows E machine could exist without being infected by malware if a few simple  precautions are followed.  --  E "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline"-- code samples, sample chapter, FAQ: 3           <http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/> ( 	    Pilgrimage: Utah's annual demoparty,                <http://pilgrimage.scene.org>   ------------------------------  * Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 22:52:29 +0000 (UTC)1 From: legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) 2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!, Message-ID: <e3e0jd$jkp$2@news.xmission.com>  / [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]   2 GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> spake the secret code6 <4qednSCPBM_04MfZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@bresnan.com> thusly:   >Richard wrote:  > 2 >> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup] >>  5 >> GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> spake the secret code 9 >> <A5-dnaDujt-yqMTZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@bresnan.com> thusly:  >>   >>   >>>Richard wrote:  >>   >>  I >>>>Email is the main transmission vector for Windows malware.  I haven't % >>>>ever used my PC as a mail reader.  >>> 6 >>>That isn't the only place that is vulnerable. [...] >>   >>  C >> Non sequitor.  I didn't say that email was the only transmission 
 >> vector. > 7 >Let's put it another way... Windows isn't that secure.   F Another non sequitor.  I didn't say that Windows was secure.  I simplyE said that in the 13 years I've had Windows boxes that I've never been  infected with a virus. --  E "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline"-- code samples, sample chapter, FAQ: 3           <http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/> ( 	    Pilgrimage: Utah's annual demoparty,                <http://pilgrimage.scene.org>   ------------------------------  * Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 22:54:14 +0000 (UTC)1 From: legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) 2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!, Message-ID: <e3e0mm$jkp$3@news.xmission.com>  / [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]   2 GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> spake the secret code6 <4qednSOPBM9Z4MfZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@bresnan.com> thusly:  C >Sorry, but all of your claims can not be believed considering the  < >problems that other users of M$ o/s have had problems with.  C Your counter claim is that Windows is so insecure that *every* user  must be infected.   E If that were the case, the economic cost would be so high that people E would simply stop using Windows and use... well, maybe they would use  VMS.  A If you can't accept the idea that even *one* machine with Windows F could exist uninfected, then this isn't a discussion based on rational< analysis of facts, but instead is one of religious ideology. --  E "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline"-- code samples, sample chapter, FAQ: 3           <http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/> ( 	    Pilgrimage: Utah's annual demoparty,                <http://pilgrimage.scene.org>   ------------------------------  * Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 22:56:26 +0000 (UTC)1 From: legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) 2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!, Message-ID: <e3e0qq$jkp$4@news.xmission.com>  / [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]   2 GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> spake the secret code6 <4qednSKPBM9J4MfZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@bresnan.com> thusly:   >Richard wrote:   : >> I've done [scans] plenty of times -- never had a thing. >>  B >> The people on this thread seem desperate to convince me that my+ >> machine is infected when I know its not.  >>   >> Who's in denial here? >  >Apparently, you are.   F You're more than welcome to fly out here and audit my machine to proveE me wrong.  Until then, you are denying the reality of my machine, not  me.  --  E "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline"-- code samples, sample chapter, FAQ: 3           <http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/> ( 	    Pilgrimage: Utah's annual demoparty,                <http://pilgrimage.scene.org>   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 00:52:05 +0200 + From: Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam> 2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!= Message-ID: <445a857b$0$60785$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk>    Richard wrote:G > Email is the main transmission vector for Windows malware.  I haven't # > ever used my PC as a mail reader.   E Are you sure of that?  As far as I know, you can't buy a filter that  I efficiently protect you from spyware.  I would not be surprised if there  @ is spyware on your computer, spyware that you do not know about.   ------------------------------  * Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 00:10:10 +0000 (UTC)1 From: legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) 2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!, Message-ID: <e3e552$moo$1@news.xmission.com>  / [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]   ; Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam> spake the secret code 9 <445a857b$0$60785$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk> thusly:    >Richard wrote: H >> Email is the main transmission vector for Windows malware.  I haven't$ >> ever used my PC as a mail reader. >  >Are you sure of that?   Am I sure of what?  / >As far as I know, you can't buy a filter that  J >efficiently protect you from spyware.  I would not be surprised if there A >is spyware on your computer, spyware that you do not know about.   ; Non sequitor.  I never said I bought or used any filters.    --  E "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline"-- code samples, sample chapter, FAQ: 3           <http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/> ( 	    Pilgrimage: Utah's annual demoparty,                <http://pilgrimage.scene.org>   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 23:20:27 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> 2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!/ Message-ID: <h9SdnU0QSsZfXsfZRVn-gQ@libcom.com>    Richard wrote:1 > [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]  > 4 > GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> spake the secret code8 > <4qednSCPBM_04MfZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@bresnan.com> thusly: >  >> Richard wrote:  >>3 >>> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]  >>> 6 >>> GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> spake the secret code: >>> <A5-dnaDujt-yqMTZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@bresnan.com> thusly: >>>  >>>  >>>> Richard wrote:  >>> K >>>>> Email is the main transmission vector for Windows malware.  I haven't ' >>>>> ever used my PC as a mail reader. 8 >>>> That isn't the only place that is vulnerable. [...] >>> D >>> Non sequitor.  I didn't say that email was the only transmission >>> vector. 9 >> Let's put it another way... Windows isn't that secure.  > H > Another non sequitor.  I didn't say that Windows was secure.  I simplyG > said that in the 13 years I've had Windows boxes that I've never been  > infected with a virus.  @ I don't think that this discussion is going anywhere reasonable.  F I will agree with Richard that with precautions one can avoid much of F the malware on the internet.  Add a NAT router or other such firewall F capabilities, and things become much safer.  I don't know of anything F that will succeed in infecting a windows box if unknown files are not H opened.  That said, you may be expecting some attachment from a trusted @ source, but that source could be compromized and you can be had.  I I'm far from an expert on malware.  I don't know what can happen without  I any operator actions.  It seems that web servers running IIS may be much  H more succeptable than a client type system.  Again, I'm no expert.  But G I will offer this.  My NAT routers keep a log of penetration attempts.  E The list is long.  Very long.  Every few minutes at best there is an  I attempt.  This is on a dial-up access internet connection.  It's usually  0 up so it's similar to a DSL or Cable connection.  G If Richard has been connected direct to the internet without router or  @ firewall protection, then I'm thinking that his precautions are E significant.  Also, when he says that he's never been infected, that  F isn't saying that malware didn't reach his system, just that it never " succeeded in infecting the system.   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450> Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com DFE Ultralights, Inc.  170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 23:24:50 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> 2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!/ Message-ID: <h9SdnUwQSsZVWcfZRVn-gQ@libcom.com>    Richard wrote:1 > [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]  > = > Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam> spake the secret code ; > <4459d104$0$60786$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk> thusly:  >  >> GreyCloud wrote:  >>> Richard wrote:J >>>> I haven't run any AV software on any of my Windows boxes for 13 years( >>>> and have never been hit by a virus. >>> K >>> That one I don't believe.  As soon as I moved and had to use a dial up  5 >>> ISP, I got hit within 5 minutes of being on line. = >> Many modems include a router with NAT functionality, [...]  > ; > True, but I didn't have NAT until I bought a linksys WAP.  > C > I ran for many years without NAT or a firewall, probably up until  > around 2002.  6 If I may ask, what OS, version, and what applications?   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450> Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com DFE Ultralights, Inc.  170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 00:54:22 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 2 Subject: Re: Mac OS X no longer immune to viruses!, Message-ID: <445ADA56.204518CE@teksavvy.com>   Dave Froble wrote:G > the malware on the internet.  Add a NAT router or other such firewall . > capabilities, and things become much safer.   E What the router can do is to open only ports that you know are using. H This prevents hackers from using Windows vulnerabilities on little knownB ports since you have no real way of getting a list of processes on7 widnows and what ports they are secretely listening to.   A However, the router will not protect you from hacks affecting the   applications that you are using.  F For instance, when sending an email, you need accesss to outgoing portH 25. When a virus on your windows box is sending spam to everyone in yourC address book, it is sending it out to the outgoing port 25 and your E router has to let those messages out because it has no way of knowing I that this it is a covert virus running in the background on your machine.    ------------------------------   Date: 4 May 2006 12:42:05 -0500 ; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) > Subject: Re: Miltu-core CPUs, threads vs AST driven approaches3 Message-ID: <$WkNjvkdkx5A@eisner.encompasserve.org>   ^ In article <Q6o6g.126$H67.39@news.cpqcorp.net>, Hoff Hoffman <hoff-remove-this@hp.com> writes: > Bob Koehler wrote: > E >>    If I read that right, there are techniques by which ASTs can be E >>    delivered to multiple threads, and when that is true one cannot H >>    assume user mode ASTs are serial process wide.  Or did I read too  >>    fast?  > E >    Multiple same-access-mode same-process parallel active ASTs are    > architecturally impermissible. >   $    That continues to make life easy.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 16:29:19 -0400 ( From: Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net>> Subject: Re: Miltu-core CPUs, threads vs AST driven approachesG Message-ID: <VtOdnSMVEaC9-cfZnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@metrocastcablevision.com>    Bill Todd wrote:   ...   J > Assuming, that is, that Bob's comment about the ability to execute ASTs G > concurrently for different threads in a multi-CPU process is correct  H > (i.e., that inter-thread behavior resembles inter-process behavior in I > this regard; otherwise, you might be better off with a process per CPU  I > and some shared memory to use for inter-process coordination, but that   > would be noticeably messier).   I And of course it turns out that the above assumption was false.  Also, I  C seem to have been half-asleep when responding, since you can still  H accomplish about the same thing (distributing many requests efficiently H in parallel across a number of threads equal to the number of available ( processors) even within that constraint.  I The way to do that is to run the several 'worker' threads at normal (not  E AST) level, and use the AST routines only to process I/O (lock-wait,  F etc.) completion and as part of that completion move the continuation C context for the relevant activity onto a 'to do' queue, which each  F thread visits whenever it has no processing to do (i.e., each time it H completes an operation or has to wait for I/O or something similar; the G AST routine also wakes a thread if it finds one or more asleep waiting  E for work).  This preserves VMS's guarantee that no more than one AST  I will be active at a time, and the extremely brief processing required at  H AST level (compared with the processing required in each thread between G interruptions) ensures that this will not impede progress even if many  I processors are working in parallel in the single process.  One can gussy  F up things by having a separate 'to do' queue for each thread (assumed E given affinity to some specific processor) which is used to continue  I work on already-existing operations (which may help leverage cached data  H across interruptions) and a main queue used only for new operations and F visited only by a thread which has no existing work ready to continue > (which is also desirable from the viewpoint of minimizing the B multi-programming level without decreasing parallelism:  the more I operations active at once, the more they will tend to interfere with and  D delay each other) - though there then needs to be a way for an idle H thread to pick up an operation started by some other thread rather than F just twiddle its thumbs.  You can also of course get into things like I varied priorities, priority-inheritance on conflicts, etc. - a great way  H to roll your own OS facilities in user space if you don't find what the  OS provides meets your needs.   F The main gotcha here is that *all* the context for each operation (at H least context which must be retained across such interruptions) must be E held in that queued context structure, rather than conveniently on a  H thread's stack - since the thread's stack gets unwound before each such I interruption.  I've recently heard the term 'stack ripping' used for one  F way of doing this, and I suspect it works just about the way RMS-11's G asynchronous processing did almost 30 years ago:  the relevant portion  F of the stack is copied into a save area in the context structure, and D restored to the stack when the operation continues (which is fairly I transparent save that one can't retain pointers to material in the stack  F across interruptions, since the stack may not be restored to the same C virtual address range it was saved from:  for this reason, one may  D instead choose to place context explicitly in the operation context % structure and operate upon it there).    Generally fun stuff.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 21:27:38 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> > Subject: Re: Miltu-core CPUs, threads vs AST driven approaches, Message-ID: <445AA9ED.AF58E262@teksavvy.com>   Bob Gezelter wrote: G > The beauty of AST based applications is that the implicit lock (which E > is really access to the process stack) is limited to one at a time.   F My point was that a single threaded AST based application maje be ableE to take care of multiple clients at the same time, but it will not be H splitting processing between CPUs. I was asking about the possibility ofG declaring an application capable of having multiple AST queues that can D execute on multile CPUs concrrrently.  (and obviously coding so that this is safe).  E It wouldn't be a multi-threaded application. But by being able to use @ multiple AST "processors", its throughput would be much greater.  F Having a single threaded AST-based server process on a 128 CPU machineD won't be able to make use of 128 CPUs and will use only one. Right ?    D The ability to tell the OS that your application was written so thatG ASTs can be delivered concurrently on different CPUs would allow one to & make full use of the multi-CPU system.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 23:36:06 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> > Subject: Re: Miltu-core CPUs, threads vs AST driven approaches9 Message-ID: <c7-dnb9Cx8jvWsfZnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@libcom.com>    JF Mezei wrote:  > Bob Gezelter wrote: H >> The beauty of AST based applications is that the implicit lock (whichF >> is really access to the process stack) is limited to one at a time. > H > My point was that a single threaded AST based application maje be ableG > to take care of multiple clients at the same time, but it will not be J > splitting processing between CPUs. I was asking about the possibility ofI > declaring an application capable of having multiple AST queues that can F > execute on multile CPUs concrrrently.  (and obviously coding so that > this is safe). > G > It wouldn't be a multi-threaded application. But by being able to use B > multiple AST "processors", its throughput would be much greater. > H > Having a single threaded AST-based server process on a 128 CPU machineF > won't be able to make use of 128 CPUs and will use only one. Right ? >  > F > The ability to tell the OS that your application was written so thatI > ASTs can be delivered concurrently on different CPUs would allow one to ( > make full use of the multi-CPU system.  D You need to read what you've written here, and think about it a bit.  G As Steve has written in this thread, at any particular level, only one   AST at a time.  I Bill then wrote in more detail about usage of ASTs, and that pretty much   matches how I've used ASTs.   H I guess the thing that really makes my head hurt when reading about AST A based applications, other than trying to keep a total picture of  I possibilities, is why would you want to re-invent the scheduler when the  ! OS already comes with a good one?    --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450> Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com DFE Ultralights, Inc.  170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 00:50:35 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> > Subject: Re: Miltu-core CPUs, threads vs AST driven approaches, Message-ID: <445AD973.F5468716@teksavvy.com>   Dave Froble wrote:H > As Steve has written in this thread, at any particular level, only one > AST at a time.  1 Yes, I have read. But my suggestion still stands.   B AST is a great dispatcher for tasks. My suggestion was to have theF ability to create what is essentially a generic queue of ASTs that get delivered on any CPU.   F But I guess that the whole AST mechanism is so hardcoded that it wouldF be quite hard for an application to tell the OS that a certain AST canG run on any CPU, but a AST in the same process that is called internally E by a system service would have the expectation of running only on the 	 same CPU.   J > possibilities, is why would you want to re-invent the scheduler when the# > OS already comes with a good one?   D Because the AST scheduler does not make use of multiple CPUs for theD same non-threaded process, something which *some* applications could really benefit from.  E If you must use threads in order to have your workload distributed on E multiple CPUs, you're already doing your own multitasking and can use H QIOW instead of ASTs since each thread can handle one connection and you5 don't care if a thread stops while waiting for input.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 15:02:57 -0400 + From: Steve Matzura <number6@speakeasy.net> ' Subject: Re: Nemonix Fast Ethernet Card 8 Message-ID: <fjjk529lehsj694if04uf7uolk5trtm0pn@4ax.com>  0 On 30 Apr 2006 09:40:35 +0100, "Dave Weatherall"! <djw-nothere@nospam.nohow> wrote:   , >On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 17:04:14 UTC, JF Mezei & ><jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote: > G >> Oh, Nemonix does build new disks for VAX systems. It can build an RZ J >> drive equivalent with 7 gigs on it. Those drives are mechanically brandF >> new, but are fully compatible with the old drives. They also have aH >> 100mbps ethernet interface that plugs into the memory bus of some VAXQ >> systems. (you don't have the full 100mbps, but still much faster than 10mbps).  > G >Has anybody tried one of these. I saw a proposal the other day to use  E >one to replace a Q-Bus FDDI adapter in a VAX 4108. Was a bit unsure  C >(i.e. have no idea) of the comparitive throughputs. I've seen two  G >quotes on the Nemonix site , about 4 MByte/sec and one 3MB/Sec. As JF  F >says, still better than 10mb ethernet but how does it compare to the  >Qbus/FDDI solution?    C I just came from a company that had 20 of these cards, and they all C worked great ... until we upgraded to VAX/VMS V7.3.  The cards were F used exclusively for a higher-speed interface for the Advanced SystemsF Concepts product called Remote Shadowing Option (RSO) which my companyE had been using for the past dozen-plus years quite successfully.  The A confluence of the VMS upgrade and the introduction of the Nemonix D cards introduced a flaw into the system that caused systems to crash? when RSO was busy writing to the Nemonix card.  When I left the E company at the end of March, Nemonix and HP were still working on the C problem.  RSO was only the catalyst, but my man at Advanced Systems E Concepts (in fact, the author of, if not the entire product, at least A the VMS portion for both VAX and Alpha) was extremely helpful and B supportive in assisting us in diagnosing the problem and giving HPF good feedback and information via SDA.  Otherwise, even though you areF right, the Nemonix cards couldn't go full bore 100mb, they were a damnA sight better than the onboard 10mb devices; well worth the money.    ------------------------------   Date: 4 May 2006 12:40:55 -0500 ; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) / Subject: Re: OpenVMS Management Station (3.2-d) 3 Message-ID: <O+0VHQYc6mIV@eisner.encompasserve.org>   O In article <op.s8040qpgzgicya@hyrrokkin>, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> writes:  > K > You could give your VMS nodes a nonroutable IP alias and have a Windows   
 > box thatJ > likewise had only IP on that network , and if that box needed internet  	 > access,  > NAT in the router.      That will stop some attacks.    ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 23:28:26 GMT % From: Rob Brown <mylastname@gmcl.com> ( Subject: Protecting windows from malwareE Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0605041725550.21338@localhost.localdomain>   " On Thu, 4 May 2006, Richard wrote:  F > ... a Windows machine could exist without being infected by malware + > if a few simple precautions are followed.   D Sorry, I seem to have come to this discussion late, so apologies if  I've missed it.   ) Please list those few simple precautions.    Thanks.      --    B Rob Brown                        b r o w n a t g m c l d o t c o mA G. Michaels Consulting Ltd.      (866)438-2101 (voice) toll free! 6 Edmonton                         (780)438-9343 (voice)5                                   (780)437-3367 (FAX) 2                                   http://gmcl.com/   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 16:30:40 -0400 ( From: Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net> Subject: Re: to bob@instantwhip G Message-ID: <VtOdnSIVEaDs-cfZnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@metrocastcablevision.com>    Jeffrey H. Coffield wrote: > Hi,  > B > I have been thinking about our conversation and have a few more  > questions. Please call me  >  > Jeff Coffield  > Digital Synergy, Inc.  > (949) 650-0526   The mind boggles.    - bill   ------------------------------  * Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 22:10:40 +0000 (UTC)1 From: legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) $ Subject: Re: X windows vulnerability, Message-ID: <e3du50$hdc$8@news.xmission.com>  / [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]   = JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> spake the secret code ( <4459280A.61DF962C@teksavvy.com> thusly:  K >It is in fact an X windows vulnerability affecting all systems running it.  > % >http://secunia.com/advisories/19307/   F It is in fact an X windows vulnerability affecting all systems running X11 6.x and X11 7.x.  D There are many, many releases and versions of the X Window System soE making the broad statement above is not true.  This is pointed out in ? the third paragraph in the "Description" section of the URL you  posted.  --  E "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline"-- code samples, sample chapter, FAQ: 3           <http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/> ( 	    Pilgrimage: Utah's annual demoparty,                <http://pilgrimage.scene.org>   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2006.248 ************************