1 INFO-VAX	Tue, 30 May 2006	Volume 2006 : Issue 298       Contents: Re: ANN: VMS Mosaic 4.0  Re: ANN: VMS Mosaic 4.0 ( Compaq Alphaserver DS20 for sale - Italy$ Re: Compaq board member sent to jail$ Re: Compaq board member sent to jail Re: DCL: IF   and .AND.  logic Re: DCL: IF   and .AND.  logicP Re: DSL upgrade [was: Re: speeding up LAVC with switch instead of  hub?]  hub?]h3 Re: FTP security suggestion, and SHOW INTRUSION BUG 0 Re: speeding up LAVC with switch instead of hub?D Re: Unix runs faster, maybe (was: Re: Educating potential VMS users)  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------   Date: 29 May 2006 17:33:47 EDT) From: cook@wvnvms.wvnet.edu (George Cook)   Subject: Re: ANN: VMS Mosaic 4.0! Message-ID: <A6DfHi2e+yzB@wvnvms>   \ In article <447AAB6E.FBD7C5B6@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes: > Found a "bug" ...  >  > https://accesd.desjardins.com  > / > On mosaic 3.8, it goes into an infinite loop. E > On Mosaic 4.0, it seems to handle better and tries to redirect to a < > "sorry you need javascript" page, but then mosaic crashes.  F I cannot get it to fail.  Build Mosaic with "@MAKE_MOSAIC DEBUG", thenD run it in the debugger and let me know where it fails.  If using theE debugger is a problem, then build it "@MAKE_MOSAIC TRACE" and send me  the traceback of the crash.   F > Mosaic 3.8 doesn't complain about soke SSL certtificates, Mosaic 4.0J > does. "SSL Error: self signed certificate in certificate chain, Continue > ?". What does this mean ?   G It is a certificate verification error message reported by SSL.  Mosaic H 3.8 did not support certificate verification.  If you do not want to seeG verification error messages, then turn SSL certificate verification off ; by setting the preference VERIFY_SSL_CERTIFICATES to False.   E As to what the message is trying to say, it appears that self signing C a certificate is not a good thing (I an definitely not an expert in  this area).   H > And one thing I really forgot to mention: for multi-line text input inJ > forms, you should really use the world-wrap attribute in the text widgetC > (but you need to turn off horizontal scrolling for this to work).   E The problem with turning word wrapping on is that line breaks are not E inserted in the text, so that the result is one long unbroken line of B text even though it appears to the user as multiple lines of text.C Depending on the application on the other end of the form, this may A or may not be a problem.  I will look into making it a preference  setting in the next release.  G > And one last thing: when starting Mosaic on a VAX, it complains about G > the LiteClue: Shape extension not supported by XServer  / Turning off  > shaped extension"  > I > While I understand this because VAX has ancient X software,  is there a I > way to prevent this message from appearing ? (when starting Mosaic from E > the session manager, any such outpout creates a window to show that 2 > error message and I like to avoid these things).   There is a new LITECLUE.C at:   +     ftp://alpha.wvnet.edu/mosaic/liteclue.c   D which will make the message go away if the preferences CLUE_OVAL and# CLUE_ROUNDED are both set to False.      George Cook  WVNET    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 22:28:02 -0400 3 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net>   Subject: Re: ANN: VMS Mosaic 4.00 Message-ID: <l_CdneWbgaguMObZRVn-sg@comcast.com>   George Cook wrote:^ > In article <447AAB6E.FBD7C5B6@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes: >  >>Found a "bug" ...  >> >>https://accesd.desjardins.com  >>/ >>On mosaic 3.8, it goes into an infinite loop. E >>On Mosaic 4.0, it seems to handle better and tries to redirect to a < >>"sorry you need javascript" page, but then mosaic crashes. >  > H > I cannot get it to fail.  Build Mosaic with "@MAKE_MOSAIC DEBUG", thenF > run it in the debugger and let me know where it fails.  If using theG > debugger is a problem, then build it "@MAKE_MOSAIC TRACE" and send me  > the traceback of the crash.  >  > F >>Mosaic 3.8 doesn't complain about soke SSL certtificates, Mosaic 4.0J >>does. "SSL Error: self signed certificate in certificate chain, Continue >>?". What does this mean ?  >  > I > It is a certificate verification error message reported by SSL.  Mosaic J > 3.8 did not support certificate verification.  If you do not want to seeI > verification error messages, then turn SSL certificate verification off = > by setting the preference VERIFY_SSL_CERTIFICATES to False.  > G > As to what the message is trying to say, it appears that self signing E > a certificate is not a good thing (I an definitely not an expert in 
 > this area).  <snip>  I A self signed certificate is a cheap way to provide encryption of things  E like user-ids and passwords and allows your users to log in securely.   F A certificate signed by an "authority" says that the "authority" made H some effort to verify that you are who you say you are and, having done G so, they will swear to it.  Authorities charge money for this service.  H   If you need to prove to your clients or customers that you really are E Amazon, PCConnection, or e-Bay then you pay for the certificate that   allows this to be verified.   ? Now you are as much of an expert as most people need to be. :-)    ------------------------------    Date: 29 May 2006 13:55:30 -0700 From: vanjkos@gmail.com 1 Subject: Compaq Alphaserver DS20 for sale - Italy C Message-ID: <1148936129.975602.150070@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com>   ' Hi to all the Unix-Guru's in here ! ;-)   F As the subject says,i have one (or more) used Compaq Alphaservers DS20 to sell.3 But let's write down something about the first one: ( -3GB sdram (mixed Infineon and Samsung);" -Single Alpha Digital 500MHz CPU ;D -4 uw scsi 80 pin 18.2GB 10krpm hot swappable bay-mounted HD drives; -675W 110/240V power supply ; , -PCI network card with scsi interface also ;) -Scsi cdrom and tape (DAT) backup drive ; : -pre-installed Open VMS (don't ask me about licences :p ).  F If anyone is interested....please mailto: vanjkos at gmail dot com fot% full details and info about shipping. ; Please note i prefer not to ship outside Europe,it gets too  expensive,you know it! :-)D Indicatively,for Germany,Austria,France and surroundings,the assured# ground shipping costs about 200=80.   * Nice greetings to everyone! Vanjkos,Italy.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 19:44:11 -0400 ) From: "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca> - Subject: Re: Compaq board member sent to jail 8 Message-ID: <9HLeg.1624$EF1.78324@news20.bellglobal.com>  ; "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message  & news:4479F47F.E38AB9F8@teksavvy.com... > Paul Sture wrote:  [...snip...] >  > J > Wow, I can smell friendly politics here. On september 11, the media willF > be on a wild frienzy to report the 5th anniversary of 9-11 and won'tH > spend much time reporting on Lay's sentence.  I smell a short sentenceB > coming  la Martha Stewart with the 5 million in bail going as a4 > political donation once it the funds are released. > G This article on the personalities of corporate execs was an eye-opener.   W http://ctv2.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060527.wxcover27/BNPrint/Business   
 Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,  Ontario, Canada." http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 02:37:06 +0200 / From: Paul Sture <paul.sture.nospam@hispeed.ch> - Subject: Re: Compaq board member sent to jail : Message-ID: <910b1$447b93b3$50db5015$3199@news.hispeed.ch>   Neil Rieck wrote:  > I > This article on the personalities of corporate execs was an eye-opener.  > Y > http://ctv2.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060527.wxcover27/BNPrint/Business  >    Interesting article thanks.   / How about this snippet from the New York Times?   ; http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/25/business/25cnd-enron.html    --- start quote ---   B Mr. Lay later said, "I firmly believe I'm innocent of the charges  against me."  B In televised remarks, he said, "We believe that God in fact is in G control and indeed he does work all things for good for those who love  
 the Lord."   --- end quote ---    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 21:11:41 +0200 3 From: Michael Unger <spam.to.unger@spamgourmet.com> ' Subject: Re: DCL: IF   and .AND.  logic , Message-ID: <4e0vihF1crbcrU1@individual.net>  & On 2006-05-27 11:12, "JF Mezei" wrote:   > [...]  > I > If it is truly documented that it only checksz the first bit, I take it ' > it was to allow to do something like:  > - > $IF $STATUS THEN WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "SUCCESS"  > # > Is such a construct widely used ?    I'd prefer a construct like:   $ status   = $STATUS $ severity = status .AND. 7 . $ IF severity .EQ. 0 THEN WRITE SYS$OUTPUT ... $ IF severity .EQ. 1 THEN ...  $ ...    Michael    --  ; Real names enhance the probability of getting real answers. 5 My e-mail account at DECUS Munich is no longer valid.    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 15:01:35 -0600 4 From: Norman Lastovica <norman.lastovica@oracle.com>' Subject: Re: DCL: IF   and .AND.  logic * Message-ID: <447B612F.E276195B@oracle.com>  0 in this case, I believe that you could just use   the "built-in" $SEVERITY symbol.   Michael Unger wrote: > ( > On 2006-05-27 11:12, "JF Mezei" wrote: > 	 > > [...]  > > K > > If it is truly documented that it only checksz the first bit, I take it ) > > it was to allow to do something like:  > > / > > $IF $STATUS THEN WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "SUCCESS"  > > % > > Is such a construct widely used ?  >  > I'd prefer a construct like: >  > $ status   = $STATUS > $ severity = status .AND. 7 0 > $ IF severity .EQ. 0 THEN WRITE SYS$OUTPUT ... > $ IF severity .EQ. 1 THEN ...  > $ ...    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 02:19:10 +0200 / From: Paul Sture <paul.sture.nospam@hispeed.ch> Y Subject: Re: DSL upgrade [was: Re: speeding up LAVC with switch instead of  hub?]  hub?]h : Message-ID: <d33ef$447b8f7e$50db5015$2453@news.hispeed.ch>   Thierry Dussuet wrote:? > On 2006-05-27, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote:  >  >>Paul Sture wrote:  >>K >>>If the telco does upgrade, make sure you ask for it. I say this since my J >>>cable company has just upgraded their standard package to 3000/256 kbs,I >>>and my latest bill says that's what I'm on, but my connection is still / >>>only giving me the previous. slower, speeds.  >>J >>With DSL, upgrades are done by changing the config at the central officeI >>and as soon as they do this, the modems at the CO and homes renegotiate A >>the speed to the new setting. So the actual upgrades have to be J >>staggered. And they work from CO to CO. The problem with DSL is that notH >>all customers are technically able to get the upgrade so it requires aF >>bit more finesse with their scripts to upgrade only those whose line >>quality is good enough.  >   F When I was on ADSL, I didn't have a problem with upgrades, but I must @ mentions that I was on a business rather than consumer contract.   > N > Then you mix in some marketing and too much traffic for the telco equipment,M > and customers can see that their line WOULD have the quality for the higher L > speed, but "somehow" they won't get more while still paying for the higherM > speed.  And on top of it, they opened the pipes and put in software traffic : > shapers, so you can't be sure of where the problem lies. >   H A few months ago I measured the up/down speed of a friend who had taken L the step of paying more for an upgraded service. Still on the old speed. :-(  G > But then again I guess this is typical behaviour for telco companies.  >    I cannot disagree there.   ------------------------------    Date: 29 May 2006 11:40:47 -0700C From: "AlexNOSPAMDaniels@themail.co.uk" <alexdaniels@themail.co.uk> < Subject: Re: FTP security suggestion, and SHOW INTRUSION BUGC Message-ID: <1148928047.150808.216690@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>    johnhreinhardt@yahoo.com wrote:  > Richard B. Gilbert wrote:  <SNIP> > > So thirty or fortyK > > legitimate users could be coming from the same IP address.  Locking out J > > that address would have brought down twenty percent of our users until7 > > somebody could straighten it out.  Not good at all.  > B > The same would apply if you were using any Telnet based terminalG > server.  It's probably the reason that it is set the way it is.  Only > > one person can connect from any given modem/serial line, butE > potentially 10's or even 100's could connect from one IP.  It might I > work to flag an IP/Port combination - at least until some timeout value . > or until the telnet session is disconnected.  E This does not have to be a problem with DECServers. I suggest you use D one of the two logicals below. I recommend the later, granularity is based on the port.      TCPIP_BUGS Note 3122          PTR 70-5-2576   @         The existing TCPIP$TELNET_NO_REM_ID logical name did not provide ?         sufficient flexibility in controlling the generation of 	 intrusion <         and audit records to meet all customer requirements.
 Therefore,-         it was necessary to add a new switch:  TCPIP$TELNET_TRUST_LOCATION.   Alex   ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 20:25:02 +0000 (UTC) P From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply)9 Subject: Re: speeding up LAVC with switch instead of hub? $ Message-ID: <e5flat$l3m$1@online.de>  G In article <20060526123151.0bd258d0.hoendech@ecc.lu>, Stefaan A Eeckels  <hoendech@ecc.lu> writes:   * > On Fri, 26 May 2006 07:50:19 +0000 (UTC)E > helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to  > reply) wrote:  > E > > I had been asking about whether it was worth it to replace my hub H > > with a switch.  For the VAXes, probably not, since when I need speedH > > is during a shadow copy, but the bottleneck there is the 5 Mb/s SCSI > > of the VAXes.  > 7 > Even SCSI-1 is capable of 5MB/s or 40Mb/s throughput:   C OK, I was assuming it was 5 Mb/s and you are saying it is 5 MB/s.      ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 22:09:05 -0500 / From: pechter@pechter.dyndns.org (Bill Pechter) M Subject: Re: Unix runs faster, maybe (was: Re: Educating potential VMS users) : Message-ID: <EL6dnSm_TLnMKubZnZ2dnUVZ_uqdnZ2d@comcast.com>  T In article <FA60F2C4B72A584DBFC6091F6A2B8684014ACDF5@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>,& Main, Kerry <Kerry.Main@hp.com> wrote: >  >  >> -----Original Message----- : >> From: Bill Pechter [mailto:pechter@pechter.dyndns.org]  >> Sent: May 26, 2006 7:20 AM  >> To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com< >> Subject: Re: Unix runs faster, maybe (was: Re: Educating  >> potential VMS users)  >>  = >> In article <hvCdnejkK5FEtuvZnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@comcast.com>, 5 >> Richard B. Gilbert <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote: ! >> >norm.raphael@metso.com wrote:  >> > >> >> = >> >> "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote on   >> 05/25/2006 10:39:32	 >> >> AM:  >> >>  >> >>  >> >>>Bill Gunshannon wrote: >> >>>3 >> >>>>In article <e54907$ljp$1@reader1.panix.com>, : >> >>>>   John F <john@pleaseSeeSigForAddress.com> writes: >> >>>>  >> >>>> = >> >>>>>OP seems, in reply to your query, rather annoyed that @ >> >>>>>nobody's willing to take on his brilliant idea for free. >> >>  >> >> [snip] >> >> 7 >> >>>Unix runs faster than VMS on comparable hardware.  >> >>  >> >> 5 >> >> I just cannot let that statement go unremarked. G >> >> Unix may run faster, but without the reliability, so "comparable" H >> >> is as always dependent on the business problem needing a solution. >> >> One man's meat.... >> >>  >> >> ? >> >>>The years have proven that fast and cheap beats "Better"   >> every time. >> >>  >> >> @ >> >> ..until the disaster strikes, then "cheap" becomes "oops." >> >>  >> >> ? >> >>>Solaris is "Free".  The last time I looked, the cheapest   >> VMS License; >> >>>cost something like $1500 US.  Technical support for   >> Solaris on a single@ >> >>>processor starts at $140/year.  It's $280 per year if you  >> want telephone B >> >>>support.  Technical support for VMS is more like $140/month. >> >>  >> >> > >> >> No argument here.  I don't know the figures, but VMS is  >> not priced for * >> >> volume sales and remains unmarketed. >> >>  >> >D >> >Strangely enough, Unix, or at least Solaris, tends to be pretty > >> >reliable.  It is not as user friendly as VMS and is laden  >> with traps for A >> >the unwary but it will generally run as long as you remember   >> to pay your  = >> >electric bill.  Unskilled tinkering as root can and will   >> bring it down  > >> >but, as with VMS, there is no defense against privilege.   >> The Solaris  = >> >systems at my last job ran like the VMS systems and came   >> down only for  > >> >hardware maintenance or for power failures lasting longer  >> than the run  >> >time of our UPS.  YMMV!  >>  0 >> The reliability issue is a red herring today. >>   > F >Bill - the challenge with Linux (and Windows) for production stuff atH >work is all of the security patches. RH Linux averages 10-20 *security*G >patches per month. Now, how does a QA shop keep up with testing all of 7 >their apps with this many OS security patches to test.  > : >Dont take my word for this - check out RHs security site:F >https://www.redhat.com/archives/enterprise-watch-list/ (click on each >month and add them up)  > G >Now, even if only 20% were deemed to be required, that is still a huge E >amount of work to keep reading this site to determine if patches are F >applicable or now and then testing the Apps with the patches that are >applicable. >  >Regards >  >  >Kerry Main  >Senior Consultant >HP Services Canada  >Voice: 613-592-4660 >Fax: 613-591-4477 >kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom  >(remove the DOT's and AT)   > 5 >OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works.   D The problem is that most of the security problems are in unnecessary8 add-on programs that are packaged with the distribution.  D The fix -- don't install any more services than you need on the box.   E If you're running an Apache server why run a SQL database for serving G static pages.  Why run sendmail on all machines listening on port 25 if - you're not using them as mail servers... etc.   C Stupid stack smashing holes in editors doesn't make the OS any less E secure...  The trick is to only intall the parts you need and knowing H what parts are insecure and should be replaced or run in chroot jails --
 if at all.   Bill     --   --  H   d|i|g|i|t|a|l had it THEN.  Don't you wish you could still buy it now!#   pechter-at-ureachtechnologies.com    ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2006.298 ************************