615 lines
24 KiB
Plaintext
615 lines
24 KiB
Plaintext
From: Digestifier <Linux-Admin-Request@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu>
|
|
To: Linux-Admin@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu
|
|
Reply-To: Linux-Admin@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu
|
|
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 94 18:13:40 EDT
|
|
Subject: Linux-Admin Digest #182
|
|
|
|
Linux-Admin Digest #182, Volume #2 Wed, 12 Oct 94 18:13:40 EDT
|
|
|
|
Contents:
|
|
SCSI HP-DAT PROBLEMS (x0202479 J.P. van de Plasse)
|
|
Re: PCNFS and file locking (Walter Lohman)
|
|
Re: PCNFS and file locking (Walter Lohman)
|
|
Re: XFree86-3.1 - Whoopee! (Alan Osborne)
|
|
Re: Support for Diamond Stealth? (doma@ludens.elte.hu)
|
|
Location of InterViews package?? (Adrian Mancini)
|
|
Re: issue in tcpip login (Bob Collie)
|
|
LILO error message question (Eric V. Bruno)
|
|
Re: Please don't post security holess... (Steve Kneizys)
|
|
Need XF3.1 compiled Mosaic (Michael R. Widner)
|
|
Re: Linux and Adaptec 1542 CF (Andre T. Fraser)
|
|
Re: Xterminals with Linux as X server (Klamer Schutte)
|
|
Re: Please don't post security holess... (Robin D. Wilson)
|
|
Looking for basic SNMP monitors (Mark H. Wood)
|
|
Re: Please don't post security holess... (Tim Bass (Network Systems Engineer))
|
|
|
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: vdplasse@newsserver.et.tudelft.nl (x0202479 J.P. van de Plasse )
|
|
Subject: SCSI HP-DAT PROBLEMS
|
|
Date: 12 Oct 1994 15:10:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
I can make an backup to a HP-DAT 2GB tape streamer,
|
|
using tar. but I don't succeed to create multiple tar's on one tape
|
|
The second tar overwrites the first one.
|
|
I've tried to use mt eom, but then when using mt tell it still say's
|
|
Location 0 !!!
|
|
|
|
ANybody gota clue
|
|
|
|
Thanx in advance
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: walter@hermes.bouw.tno.nl (Walter Lohman)
|
|
Subject: Re: PCNFS and file locking
|
|
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 1994 14:46:07 GMT
|
|
|
|
Ron Hume (rhume@cygnus.nb.ca) wrote:
|
|
: Hi,
|
|
: I am running FTP software's PCTCP and Interdrive,
|
|
: to mount some of our unix (Linux) boxes from PC's.
|
|
: My only problem is that when I PCNFS mount the
|
|
: linux drive I get the error message 'No port for remote
|
|
: lock manager' or something close to that. I looked
|
|
: for a lockd but couldn't find one.
|
|
|
|
: Any suggestions (am I overlooking one that is included).
|
|
|
|
: I am using Slackware 2.0.1.
|
|
|
|
: Ron.
|
|
|
|
: --
|
|
: Ron Hume
|
|
: Network Administrator
|
|
: Cygnus Telcommunications Engineering Labs
|
|
: CANADA
|
|
|
|
Take a look at the /etc/rc.d directory, I believe the file rc.inet2
|
|
In this file the necessary rpc servers are not automatically configured
|
|
for use. You'll need the rpc.portmap (/sbin) rpc.nfsd abd rpc.pcnfsd at least
|
|
|
|
If you're not using root to map your drives, you might want to change the
|
|
rpc.mountd line into rpc.mountd -n which lets you mount drives as a non root
|
|
user.
|
|
|
|
I've this setup running a few days and seems stable enough. Originally I was
|
|
running FreeBSD-current, but now switched to Linux to compare the systems.
|
|
I found the Linux nfs implementation a bit slower than the *BSD versions, but
|
|
I haven't tested it much yet on the Linux box. Also when doing heavy compiles
|
|
on the Linux box, it seems to effect the nfs performance a great deal more
|
|
than that was the case while running the *BSD system. Hope this helps,
|
|
|
|
Walter (lnw@bouw.tno.nl)
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: walter@hermes.bouw.tno.nl (Walter Lohman)
|
|
Subject: Re: PCNFS and file locking
|
|
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 1994 14:48:29 GMT
|
|
|
|
Ron Hume (rhume@cygnus.nb.ca) wrote:
|
|
: Hi,
|
|
: I am running FTP software's PCTCP and Interdrive,
|
|
: to mount some of our unix (Linux) boxes from PC's.
|
|
: My only problem is that when I PCNFS mount the
|
|
: linux drive I get the error message 'No port for remote
|
|
: lock manager' or something close to that. I looked
|
|
: for a lockd but couldn't find one.
|
|
|
|
: Any suggestions (am I overlooking one that is included).
|
|
|
|
: I am using Slackware 2.0.1.
|
|
|
|
: Ron.
|
|
|
|
: --
|
|
: Ron Hume
|
|
: Network Administrator
|
|
: Cygnus Telcommunications Engineering Labs
|
|
: CANADA
|
|
|
|
|
|
PS. I forgot to tell you, you might need to add the following line to
|
|
the file /etc/rpc
|
|
|
|
pcnfsd 1500001 pcnfs
|
|
|
|
|
|
The rpc.portmap program needs this line. After running check with rpcinfo
|
|
if the portmapper is initialised correctly.
|
|
|
|
Walter
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: alan@osborne.demon.co.uk (Alan Osborne)
|
|
Subject: Re: XFree86-3.1 - Whoopee!
|
|
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 1994 13:58:05 +0000
|
|
|
|
Alan Cox (iialan@iifeak.swan.ac.uk) wrote:
|
|
|
|
: I can't get any of openlook or fvwm to work. I'm inclined to think this is
|
|
: probably X11R6 incompatibilities with these packages rather than bugs. So
|
|
|
|
Erm.. I'm still using olvwm after moving to X11R6, and can't remember
|
|
doing anything special except maybe shifting a couple of libraries...
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
AlanO
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: doma@ludens.elte.hu
|
|
Subject: Re: Support for Diamond Stealth?
|
|
Date: 12 Oct 94 13:52:48 +0200
|
|
|
|
In article <35qbpo$g5f@nic.umass.edu>, durzya@titan.ucs.umass.edu (Alexander A Durzy) writes:
|
|
> Does anyone know if the current version of Linux
|
|
> supports the S3 chipset in the Diamond Stealth
|
|
> video cards??
|
|
>
|
|
|
|
Yes, it does ...
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: amancini@bmerhbbf.bnr.ca (Adrian Mancini)
|
|
Subject: Location of InterViews package??
|
|
Date: 12 Oct 1994 15:58:26 GMT
|
|
|
|
Could someone tell me where I could locate the InterViews package; I'm interested in the iclass C++ class browser?
|
|
|
|
Thanx in advance
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
==================================================
|
|
- Adrian Mancini ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
==================================================
|
|
- The worst fear is fear of a dream. ~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: collieb@iia.org (Bob Collie)
|
|
Subject: Re: issue in tcpip login
|
|
Date: 12 Oct 1994 17:23:41 GMT
|
|
|
|
Champ Clark (c-clark@freenet2.scri.fsu.edu) wrote:
|
|
|
|
: Question:
|
|
|
|
: I would like a /etc/issue of some type to come up when a person telnets to
|
|
: my machine. I am pretty sure I will have to modify login.c or something, whihc
|
|
: I have no problem with, but I am having trouble finding this. Is this
|
|
: assumption correct? I am using slackware 2.0.0 , if that makes any difference.
|
|
: Thanks
|
|
: --
|
|
|
|
There is no need to modify the login.c, merely place what you want
|
|
displayed to that telnetter in /etc/issue.net and your problem will be
|
|
solved!
|
|
|
|
Bob Collie
|
|
collieb@iia.org
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: eribruno@netcom.com (Eric V. Bruno)
|
|
Subject: LILO error message question
|
|
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 1994 20:25:18 GMT
|
|
|
|
I have a kernel which correctly boots and works from floppy.
|
|
I copied the kernel to /vmlinuz. When I attempt to
|
|
run lilo I get the following message:
|
|
|
|
Kernel vmlinuz too big!
|
|
|
|
What is this really telling me?
|
|
|
|
I get the error when attempting to install to Master Boot Partition
|
|
or the Boot record of the first partition. The first parition is flagged
|
|
as bootable.
|
|
|
|
Do I need to leave more room before defining partition 1.
|
|
|
|
I am running a Maxtor 340 mb drive with a linux native and linux swap
|
|
partition only. The drive is only at 50% capacity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Subject: Re: Please don't post security holess...
|
|
From: STEVO@acad.ursinus.edu (Steve Kneizys)
|
|
Date: 12 Oct 94 11:15:32 EST
|
|
|
|
M. K. Shenk (mkshenk@u.washington.edu) wrote:
|
|
: When you break in and USE THE SYSTEM. Not when you break in. Well, a few
|
|
: cycles for the login program. So I concede.
|
|
|
|
: >CPU cycles. Others have to pay for them and you don't pay. (Yes, even
|
|
: >universities have a theoretical value for CPU hours and if they sell
|
|
: <snip>
|
|
: >permission.
|
|
: >These are just two examples and I'm sure there are more.
|
|
|
|
: These examples do not bear on my statement, which was: (read..I
|
|
: specified this rather directly..I am not talking about doing anything
|
|
: with the system..) typing a correct response to a password prompt for
|
|
: an account which is not yours and hanging up does no harm. I'm not
|
|
: talking here about any of that stuff. I am not talking about using a
|
|
: compiler. I am not talking about typing ls. I am talking about the mere
|
|
: act of gaining entry. Now go on and read the rest of my post.
|
|
|
|
WRONG!!!
|
|
|
|
Attempting to break in is Trespassing. Breaking in is a break-in...entering is
|
|
entering is guaranteed as you get a prompt if you break in.
|
|
|
|
Succeed or not, you are guilty of trespass. Succeed, you are guilty of
|
|
breaking and entering. EVEN IF YOU DO NOT DO ANYTHING BUT LOG OFF!
|
|
|
|
So now you think Trespassing is legal eh? So is breaking and entering?
|
|
|
|
Geez...sounds like some serious rationalization to me!
|
|
|
|
Steve...
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: mrwidner@kimbark.uchicago.edu (Michael R. Widner)
|
|
Subject: Need XF3.1 compiled Mosaic
|
|
Reply-To: mrwidner@midway.uchicago.edu
|
|
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 1994 17:17:07 GMT
|
|
|
|
I'm looking for Mosaic for Linux compiled and linked to XFree 3.1 libraries.
|
|
Of course I can get Mosaic for XF2.x anywhere, but I don't have any of
|
|
the XFree 2.x stuff on my system, and I'm not real keen on putting the
|
|
libs on just to run Mosaic.
|
|
|
|
If you're wondering, I've got a GXE64 Pro, which is why I don't have any
|
|
of the XFree 2.x stuff on my system. Running X at 640x480 didn't
|
|
particularly appeal to me.
|
|
|
|
Thanks for any info.
|
|
--
|
|
Michael R. Widner
|
|
widner@uchicago.edu - atreus@primus.com
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: fat@cldc.howard.edu (Andre T. Fraser)
|
|
Subject: Re: Linux and Adaptec 1542 CF
|
|
Date: 10 Oct 1994 04:48:30 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
To get lilo to look at an alternate address for you adaptec do the
|
|
following:
|
|
when you boot your system with the boot disk and it
|
|
prompts you for any additional parameter type in ramdisk
|
|
aha154x=0x230,scsiinterupt here,scsi host adapter id, hard drive host id
|
|
for example if you scsi host adapter is set at IRQ 11 and host id 7 and
|
|
you hard drive is host id zero you would type the following at the LILO:
|
|
prompt,
|
|
LILO: ramdisk aha154x=0x230,11,7,0
|
|
-hope this helps
|
|
|
|
Matti Aarnio (mea@utu.fi) wrote:
|
|
: leadfoot@leftlane (Mark Curtis) writes:
|
|
: >
|
|
: >I just tried to install linux on my Dell 466/T, but I ran into a
|
|
: >real problem. It looks like the driver for AHA-1542 SCSI controllers
|
|
: >only looks at the default address of 330. Mine controller is at 230
|
|
: >because my MIDI card is at 330. That is the default address that
|
|
: >all MIDI software will look for the MIDI card at so I don't want to
|
|
: >change it. All my other software works find with the SCSI controller
|
|
: >at 230.
|
|
: >
|
|
: >Is there a way to tell the kernel to look at the alternate address of
|
|
: >230 for the 1542CF? I'm using the CD in the "Internet CD" book.
|
|
: >I beleive that release is the 1.2 Slackware release.
|
|
|
|
: I feel the Slackware 1.2 is OLD... Thus the driver
|
|
: source file might have been moved since then..
|
|
|
|
: At the moment there is no way to externally tell the kernel to look
|
|
: at somewhere non-standard -- except at my own machine. (Linux 1.1.52)
|
|
: I have been developing LILO options for AHA1542, which lets users
|
|
: like you to override the default locations (and to set some other
|
|
: more esoteric configuration parameters...)
|
|
|
|
: For now your option is:
|
|
: - install the Adaptec on 330, deinstall the MIDI/Sound
|
|
: for a moment
|
|
: - generate new kernel AFTER you have edited the
|
|
: /usr/src/linux/drivers/scsi/aha1542.c
|
|
: to look for the new controller location(s).
|
|
: Edit the file, and start by looking for '0x330' in it.
|
|
: Preceeding comment explains what to do with it.
|
|
: - install that new kernel, change your Adaptec,
|
|
: install the MIDI/Sound-card..
|
|
|
|
: >I've built the two floppies (Boot, Root) and they work except the
|
|
: >kernel probes never find my SCSI controller or it's devices.
|
|
: >
|
|
: >Any ideas?
|
|
|
|
: This SHOULD be FAQ, I guess -- I hope my LILO-things are
|
|
: ready before the release of Linux 1.2, and thus will make
|
|
: the trouble obsolete..
|
|
|
|
: >Thanks,
|
|
: >
|
|
: >Mark
|
|
|
|
: /Matti Aarnio <mea@utu.fi>
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
... __0 fat@cldc.howard.edu (202) 806-4810
|
|
.. _`\<,_ Andre T. Fraser (Sys Op)
|
|
___(*)/_(*)__________________Computer Learning and Design Center____________
|
|
Ask me a question. If I don't know the answer, then come back tomorrow
|
|
and I'll have an answer.
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^http://www.cldc.howard.edu/~fat^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: klamer@ph.tn.tudelft.nl (Klamer Schutte)
|
|
Subject: Re: Xterminals with Linux as X server
|
|
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 1994 14:53:23 GMT
|
|
|
|
In <1994Oct8.202354.20384@thor.xon.com> edwards@thor.xon.com (Ken Edwards) writes:
|
|
|
|
:Ken Edwards (edwards@thor.xon.com) wrote:
|
|
:: Mark A. Davis (mark@taylor.infi.net) wrote:
|
|
:: : srini@igt.com (Srini Seetharam) writes:
|
|
:: [ ... ]
|
|
:: : >Currently, the Linux machines respond to it
|
|
:: : >BUT the windows are managed by the
|
|
:: : >Linux machine. As one can guess, once many Xterminals are served
|
|
:: : >by a single Linux machine, it is soon overwhelmed.
|
|
|
|
:: How many Xterminals are you looking to hook to one Linux machine?
|
|
|
|
:: This is correct, the window manager (I use fvwm) does not impose much
|
|
:: load on the host, if you have many Xterminals connected to a Linux box
|
|
:: and is slowing down, you probably need more memory, faster processor, or
|
|
:: more Linux boxes. You did not say how many Xterminals you have connected,
|
|
:: but I would not think that a Linux box would be a satisfactory host to more
|
|
:: than 3 or 4 Xterminals. (Maybe a P90 with 64Megs could do more, but probably
|
|
:: not too many). My 486dx66/16Meg is happy serving 2 Xterminals, but I would
|
|
:: not want to impose on it much further. Mind you this is a development box
|
|
:: with heavy users. I look at my own login right now for example and find that
|
|
:: I have 16 entries in my window list, including 8 xterms, gpanel, gfm, tkmail,
|
|
:: goodstuff, xsysinfo, xeyes, cmdframe, and of course the newsreader. If your
|
|
:: users use these kind of resources, you will not be able to support too many.
|
|
|
|
High response times you get from a system is most of the time due to to paging
|
|
and / or swapping. Adding a faster CPU will not help you very much. Adding
|
|
memory will. A nice rull of thumb is to have 8 Meg of memory for every
|
|
X display you manage, and an additional 4 Meg for the system software (and thus
|
|
you need about 12Meg for a stand alone system). Users only having one xterm
|
|
reading news will use less; power users will use more.
|
|
|
|
This 8 Meg is the amount of menory which is swapped in at a certain moment.
|
|
A window manager typically is used often, and stays swapped in. So running
|
|
this on a xterminal rather then on the host is a good way to save available RAM.
|
|
Besides that, it is one of the X client programs you have to wait for when
|
|
it should be paged in. Thaat is the major advantage of running it local -
|
|
switching to another window does not cost the time to swap in the
|
|
window manager anymore (but still perhaps the time to swap in another client!)
|
|
|
|
Klamer
|
|
|
|
(PS The above is based upon experiences with Sun Sparc 1 en 2 -- but will be
|
|
similar for Linux boxes.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
Klamer Schutte -- +31-15-786054 / +31-15-692000
|
|
klamer@ph.tn.tudelft.nl / schutte@tpd.tno.nl
|
|
http://www.ph.tn.tudelft.nl:2000/People/klamer/Klamer.html
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: robin@pencom.com (Robin D. Wilson)
|
|
Subject: Re: Please don't post security holess...
|
|
Date: 12 Oct 1994 15:16:45 GMT
|
|
Reply-To: robin@pencom.com
|
|
|
|
In article <37fq60$8jc@nntp1.u.washington.edu> mkshenk@u.washington.edu (M.
|
|
K. Shenk) writes:
|
|
:In article <jeffpkCxJ8Hu.JJG@netcom.com>,
|
|
:Jeff Kesselman <jeffpk@netcom.com> wrote:
|
|
:>Yeah, what Patrick said.
|
|
:>
|
|
:>Surely the man who thinks his breaking into MY machine and using MY
|
|
:>system resources for something I didn't intend is not a crime wouldnot
|
|
:>mind if I broke into his car and borrowed it to run drugs??? I'll return
|
|
:>it as soon as I'm done.....
|
|
:
|
|
:I suppose I was unclear. What I meant: someone who does this may be
|
|
:commiting a crime (they are) but they are not necessarily a criminal
|
|
:in the sense that you probably think about criminals. You have a nice
|
|
:label that allows you to feel certain things about anyone you plaster it
|
|
:on. If all you meant by criminal ws "someone who has broken the law" then
|
|
:i would agree. But you probably don't, even if you think you do. I
|
|
:am not (if you people could get it through your thick heads) in favor
|
|
:of system cracking. What i am AGAINST is the mindless damning of anyone
|
|
:to ever bypass a login prompt. Some of these people are 11-12 year old
|
|
:children. I'm not even saying that they should be treated any
|
|
:differently because of this. I am saying your label of criminal may
|
|
:not fit. I am opposing a knee-jerk reaction to someone that has done
|
|
:something that you -> have a perfect right to be upset about, and a legal
|
|
:right to get them in trouble <- but really has in many cases not done any
|
|
:harm. I.e.: someone uses cycles on my Linux box. They are essentially
|
|
:free. I may not want him there, but it is possible for him to enter and
|
|
:leave and *do me no harm.* Did I say this makes it "okay."? Don't
|
|
:respond to what I am not saying. It is also possible for someone to
|
|
:enter your house and do you no harm. NOT "do you no wrong" but "do
|
|
:you no harm." Can you accept this statemnt, with no implications?
|
|
|
|
How are you defining "harm"? My Webster's defines it:
|
|
|
|
1 harm \'harm\ (noun)
|
|
[ME, fr. OE hearm; akin to OHG harm injury, OSlav sramu shame]
|
|
(bef. 12c)
|
|
1: physical or mental damage: INJURY
|
|
2: MISCHIEF, HURT
|
|
|
|
2 harm (verb)
|
|
(bef. 12c)
|
|
:to cause harm to
|
|
syn see INJURE
|
|
|
|
If you are simply trying to say "there is no physical damage", this may be
|
|
true. But _clearly_ there is psychological damage. If you are just trying
|
|
to say that the injured party will not suffer "physical" injury (to himself
|
|
or his machine) -- perhaps you are right... Well "whoop-de-doo"!
|
|
Psychological _harm_ can sometimes last _much_ longer and be significantly
|
|
more costly to correct than the "physical" harms. I'd be willing to bet that
|
|
someone who knows he's been cracked will spend a siginificant amount of time
|
|
trying to plug the security holes on his system -- time isn't "Free". I'd
|
|
bet that the "harmed" party will spend some amount of time 'worrying' about
|
|
the security of his system -- mental anguish is not "Free".
|
|
|
|
:Folks, opposing a statement that is true for what you think it may imply
|
|
:is pathetic. First and foremost is the truth of a statement. Statement
|
|
:"A" if true, is still true if the consequence of believing it is the
|
|
:destruction of all living things. My point: do what you like. People
|
|
:should not enter your system. If you bend reality in your mind, you
|
|
:are pathetic.
|
|
|
|
First, you are "wrong"! Second, it is people like you who give "Crackers"
|
|
fodder for thier rationalizations. Out of one side of your mouth you say,
|
|
"no harm done", and out of the other you say "but it is wrong". You can have
|
|
"harm" without wrong-doing (accidents), but you can't have "wrong-doing"
|
|
without harm.
|
|
|
|
The very idea that my computer (and it's cycles) is any less "real" than my
|
|
house or my car is rediculous. It is _mine_! If I don't want other people
|
|
using it -- then that is _my_ perogotive. If you violate my security -- then
|
|
you have stolen from me -- period. It is no different than opening the
|
|
closed door to my house.
|
|
|
|
By your logic, I could store food in your refrigerator -- simply because it
|
|
causes _no_harm_ to you. By your logic, I could borrow your phone whenever I
|
|
want (so long as I call toll-free or local numbers) because it never impacts
|
|
you "physically". By your logic, I could steal your car while you are away
|
|
(so long as you weren't trying to use it) -- and so long as I maintained it
|
|
properly, and replaced whatever consumable items I used (gas, oil, wiper
|
|
fluid, etc.) -- "no_harm_done".
|
|
|
|
It is _very_ convienent to re-invent "reality" to meet ones needs. But the
|
|
reality is: breaking into my house and breaking into my computer are the
|
|
same. And whether I choose to be forgiving or press charges (depending on
|
|
the circumstances) is not relevant to the nature of the injury to me and my
|
|
property. I.E., if the cracker is a 12 yo. who is simply out "joyriding" on
|
|
the InfoBahn -- he is no less responsible than the 12 yo. that breaks into my
|
|
house (just to see if he can), or steals my car for a "joyride" -- but brings
|
|
it back with "no_harm_done".
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
=============================================================================
|
|
*** These are my opinions... Mine! All Mine! Minemineminemineminemine! ***
|
|
=============================================================================
|
|
Robin D. Wilson robin@pencom.com Pencom Software
|
|
701 Canyon Bend Dr. 9050 Capital of Texas Hwy
|
|
Pflugerville, TX 78660 Austin, TX 78759
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: mwood@indyvax.iupui.edu (Mark H. Wood)
|
|
Subject: Looking for basic SNMP monitors
|
|
Date: 10 Oct 94 15:54:01 -0500
|
|
|
|
Any pointers to SNMP monitoring code that might work under Linux without a
|
|
whole lot of rewriting, would be appreciated.
|
|
--
|
|
Mark H. Wood, Lead Systems Programmer +1 317 274 0749 [@disclaimer@]
|
|
Internet: MWOOD@INDYVAX.IUPUI.EDU BITNET: MWOOD@INDYVAX
|
|
All that is necessary for the triumph of ignorance, is that knowledgable men do
|
|
nothing.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: bass@cais2.cais.com (Tim Bass (Network Systems Engineer))
|
|
Subject: Re: Please don't post security holess...
|
|
Date: 12 Oct 1994 17:45:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Everyone, can we please stop the flame wars and move this discussion
|
|
off the comp.os.linux.admin forum. We all will never agree on this
|
|
issues, its a religious one that been around since the cavemen first
|
|
logged in to their favorite Bedrock internet access provider.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robin D. Wilson (robin@pencom.com) wrote:
|
|
: In article <37foqi$8g2@nntp1.u.washington.edu> mkshenk@u.washington.edu (M.
|
|
: K. Shenk) writes:
|
|
: :In article <1994Oct11.152740.15304@cs.cornell.edu>,
|
|
: :La'szlo' Lada'nyi <ladanyi@cs.cornell.edu> wrote:
|
|
: :>mkshenk@u.washington.edu (M. K. Shenk) writes:
|
|
: :>[...]
|
|
: :>>>> Penetrating the security of a
|
|
: :>>>> computer system is totally harmless in and of itself.
|
|
: :>>> ^^^ LOOOK! LOOOOK at this! "in and of itself."
|
|
: :>>>This is your opinion, and you would probably find that 99% of
|
|
: :>>>administrators will disagree with you.
|
|
|
|
: Mr. Shenk, you are _simply_ (and completely) WRONG! Privacy is a _very_
|
|
: significant thing. You are advocating a way of life that leaves people no
|
|
: choice but to completely conceal their private information within their own
|
|
: heads.
|
|
|
|
: If I simply walked up to your front door, picked the lock, opened the door,
|
|
: and then walked away -- would you feel any less secure? I'll bet you'd
|
|
: figure out how to put a better lock on the door. When people put password
|
|
: protection on their systems, it is simply a means to prevent _unwanted_
|
|
: access to their systems. People know (most of them anyway) that the password
|
|
: protection is no more of a guarantee than a deadbolt on the front door, but
|
|
: it is an attempt -- with the tools at hand. When you break that protection,
|
|
: you have violated their _wishes_ (100% of the time -- not even 99%),
|
|
: otherwise they wouldn't have placed the restriction on the system in the
|
|
: first place. Even if they have it _poorly_ protected, that simply says more
|
|
: about thier _ability_ to protect the system -- not about thier intentions.
|
|
|
|
: Clearly, you have alot to learn about being _human_...
|
|
|
|
: --
|
|
: -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
: *** These are my opinions... Mine! All Mine! Minemineminemineminemine! ***
|
|
: -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
: Robin D. Wilson robin@pencom.com Pencom Software
|
|
: 701 Canyon Bend Dr. 9050 Capital of Texas Hwy
|
|
: Pflugerville, TX 78660 Austin, TX 78759
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
|
|
|
|
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
|
|
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
|
|
|
|
Internet: Linux-Admin-Request@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU
|
|
|
|
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.admin) via:
|
|
|
|
Internet: Linux-Admin@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU
|
|
|
|
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
|
|
nic.funet.fi pub/OS/Linux
|
|
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
|
|
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
|
|
|
|
End of Linux-Admin Digest
|
|
******************************
|