From nobody at nowhere.invalid Tue Nov 1 10:19:57 2005 From: nobody at nowhere.invalid (Steven Maesslein) Date: Tue Nov 1 04:20:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: DVD-R vs DVD+R References: Message-ID: On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 18:43:32 -0800, Ray coughed into spamcop.geeks and left this in : > Found this doing a google search when wondering the same thing myself... > > http://www.cdfreaks.com/article/113 Warning: You can't actually read that article because a friggin ad pops up in an ILAYER in the foreground, blocking out the text. Fsckin' marketoons........ -- Steve The most difficult years of marriage are those following the wedding. From borgholio at storymind.com Tue Nov 1 01:23:04 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Tue Nov 1 04:25:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: DVD-R vs DVD+R In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Steven Maesslein wrote: > On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 18:43:32 -0800, Ray coughed into spamcop.geeks and > left this in : > > >>Found this doing a google search when wondering the same thing myself... >> >>http://www.cdfreaks.com/article/113 > > > Warning: You can't actually read that article because a friggin ad pops > up in an ILAYER in the foreground, blocking out the text. > > Fsckin' marketoons........ > 'S ok, I read it before. :) From devnull at spamcop.net Tue Nov 1 08:43:51 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Tue Nov 1 09:15:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: DVD-R vs DVD+R References: Message-ID: "Borgholio" | > | >>Found this doing a google search when wondering the same thing myself... | >> | >>http://www.cdfreaks.com/article/113 | > | > | > Warning: You can't actually read that article because a friggin ad pops | > up in an ILAYER in the foreground, blocking out the text. | > | > Fsckin' marketoons........ | > | | 'S ok, I read it before. :) And that helps the rest of us how? From borgholio at storymind.com Tue Nov 1 09:36:36 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Tue Nov 1 12:40:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: DVD-R vs DVD+R In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Frog Prince wrote: > "Borgholio" > | > > | >>Found this doing a google search when wondering the same thing myself... > | >> > | >>http://www.cdfreaks.com/article/113 > | > > | > > | > Warning: You can't actually read that article because a friggin ad pops > | > up in an ILAYER in the foreground, blocking out the text. > | > > | > Fsckin' marketoons........ > | > > | > | 'S ok, I read it before. :) > > And that helps the rest of us how? > > Dude...telepathy! From SC.10.myspamgobbler at spamcowboy.net Tue Nov 1 09:52:36 2005 From: SC.10.myspamgobbler at spamcowboy.net (Brian) Date: Tue Nov 1 12:55:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: DVD-R vs DVD+R In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Steven Maesslein wrote: > On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 18:43:32 -0800, Ray coughed into spamcop.geeks and > left this in : > >> Found this doing a google search when wondering the same thing myself... >> >> http://www.cdfreaks.com/article/113 > > Warning: You can't actually read that article because a friggin ad pops > up in an ILAYER in the foreground, blocking out the text. > > Fsckin' marketoons........ > My setup didn't see the popup. Firefox without adblocker. My hosts file blocks many ads. -- Brian SC.10.myspamgobbler@spamcowboy.net From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Tue Nov 1 14:58:29 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Pop) Date: Tue Nov 1 15:00:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Seen in a spam Message-ID: "did this campaign reach you in error? pls click the remove link at our website, and enter your id there" Yeah, I know, don't read 'em, but it was right there in front of me! What an idiot! Wonder how many people actually still click? Pop -- --- No one should ever have to unsubscribe from a list they did not intentionally subscribe to. From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Nov 1 15:25:03 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ellen) Date: Tue Nov 1 15:30:11 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] 11/1/2005 Maint Window Message-ID: Maintenance Window Nov 1, 2005 During the period 14:00-18:00 -0800 we will have an outage of about 45 minutes for the installation of new hardware for the reporting system. Thank you for your patience. The email system will not affected by this maintenance window. Ellen SpamCop follow/ups to SpamCop Please propagate to the forums From nobody at nowhere.invalid Tue Nov 1 21:51:44 2005 From: nobody at nowhere.invalid (Steven Maesslein) Date: Tue Nov 1 15:55:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: DVD-R vs DVD+R References: Message-ID: On Tue, 01 Nov 2005 09:52:36 -0800, Brian coughed into spamcop.geeks and left this in : >>> http://www.cdfreaks.com/article/113 >> >> Warning: You can't actually read that article because a friggin ad pops >> up in an ILAYER in the foreground, blocking out the text. >> >> Fsckin' marketoons........ > > My setup didn't see the popup. Firefox without adblocker. My hosts file > blocks many ads. Didn't show up second time round here either, so I investigated further. ads.cdfreaks.com deposits a cookie which, if present, blocks the ILAYER. So, first time round you get the ad and the cookie is deposited. Second time round the cookie is there so no ad. Fsckin' marketoons. -- Steve Hurewitz's Memory Principle: The chance of forgetting something is directly proportional to ..... to ........ uh .............. From MikeE at ster.invalid Tue Nov 1 13:07:04 2005 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Tue Nov 1 16:10:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Seen in a spam References: Message-ID: Pop wrote: > "did this campaign reach you in error? > pls click the remove link at our website, and enter your > id there" > > Yeah, I know, don't read 'em, but it was right there in front of > me! What an idiot! Wonder how many people actually still click? You can read 'em if you want and you can believe 'em if you want. The accuracy of the 'rules' about spam are as 'perfect' or imperfect as any other rules. In reality, altho' the proportions are weighted heavily toward rules #1 & #2, there are actually all kinds of unsolicited mail, including mail of which you are on a list and the party who sent you the mail will remove you from that list if you ask them to. There are a *lot* of reasons not to read spam, not the least of which is the general avoidance of 'thinking about' what spam sez. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Nov 1 17:56:25 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ellen) Date: Tue Nov 1 18:00:14 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Maint Window completed Message-ID: The maintenance window scheduled for 11/1/2005 has been completed. Thanks! Ellen SpamCop follow/ups to SpamCop Please propagate to the forums From SC.10.myspamgobbler at spamcowboy.net Tue Nov 1 23:39:56 2005 From: SC.10.myspamgobbler at spamcowboy.net (Brian) Date: Wed Nov 2 02:45:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: DVD-R vs DVD+R In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Steven Maesslein wrote: > On Tue, 01 Nov 2005 09:52:36 -0800, Brian coughed into spamcop.geeks and > left this in : > >>>> http://www.cdfreaks.com/article/113 >>> Warning: You can't actually read that article because a friggin ad pops >>> up in an ILAYER in the foreground, blocking out the text. >>> >>> Fsckin' marketoons........ >> My setup didn't see the popup. Firefox without adblocker. My hosts file >> blocks many ads. > > Didn't show up second time round here either, so I investigated further. > ads.cdfreaks.com deposits a cookie which, if present, blocks the ILAYER. > So, first time round you get the ad and the cookie is deposited. Second > time round the cookie is there so no ad. > > Fsckin' marketoons. > There's something else going on as well, cause I didn't accept a cookie from them and it was my first time there. I very seldom accept cookies. -- Brian SC.10.myspamgobbler@spamcowboy.net From usenet at lordblacklaw.co.uk Wed Nov 2 08:46:48 2005 From: usenet at lordblacklaw.co.uk (Gareth Halfacree) Date: Wed Nov 2 03:45:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: DVD-R vs DVD+R In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Steven Maesslein wrote: > More set-top DVD players are compatible with -R than +R. Not strictly true if your DVD recorder supports bitsetting. Bitsetting is where you change the book type of a DVD+R or DVD+RW to DVD-ROM, making set-top DVD players think it's a professionally-made pressed DVD video. You cannot set DVD-R to DVD-ROM; trying will just result in multiple coasters. So, if you can bitset the discs to DVD-ROM, buy DVD+R for maximum compatibility. The only other difference (when it comes to standalone, non-computer, DVD writers) is that DVD-R supports the DVD-VR format. This is an attempt to bring some of the advantages of the DVD-RAM format to DVD-R. Again, this is a format only supported by DVD-R and not DVD+R. If your standalone DVD recorder doesn't support DVD-VR, then there's no point buying DVD-R discs; also, DVD-VR is totally incompatible with the vast majority of set-top DVD players out there. -- -Gareth Halfacree http://gareth.halfacree.co.uk From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Nov 2 09:22:39 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ellen) Date: Wed Nov 2 09:25:14 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] System outages/instability Message-ID: Morning folks -- yes we are having system problems and operations/engineering is working the issues. You may see failures trying to log-in or other error messages. Please do not try to change your password as this will not solve the problem. The problems will probably continue sporadically. There is no ETA right now for complete resolution but this is being treated by everyone as a priority 1 situation. Thank you for your patience! The email system is not affected. I suppose the good news is that there will still be shiney new spams to report after the problems are resolved -- and that is also the bad news .... Ellen SpamCop follow-ups to SpamCop Please propagate to the forums From devnull at spamcop.net Wed Nov 2 12:00:31 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Wed Nov 2 12:05:09 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Question on blocking view of source on a web page Message-ID: We're using DreamweaverMX and would like to prevent a visitor and competitor from viewing, copying, pirating the web site code. We would also like to block access to the underlying files. We do want to allow the visitor to print the data to hard copy but we do not want to allow anyone to download the digital files. Is there a practical way to prevent coping? If not is there some way to make the deed harder to accomplish? Last I'm looking for an effective way to watermark or tag all the files so that we can substantiate copy right violations FP brother_rabbit @ hotmail.com From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Wed Nov 2 19:54:51 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Wed Nov 2 14:55:13 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Question on blocking view of source on a web page In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Frog Prince wrote: > We're using DreamweaverMX and would like to prevent a visitor and competitor > from viewing, copying, pirating the web site code. > > We would also like to block access to the underlying files. We do want to > allow the visitor to print the data to hard copy but we do not want to allow > anyone to download the digital files. > > Is there a practical way to prevent coping? If not is there some way to > make the deed harder to accomplish? > > Last I'm looking for an effective way to watermark or tag all the files so > that we can substantiate copy right violations. You could try some of the javascript encryption scripts. I haven't tried them so I'm not sure how they might work or how well, but: http://www.felgall.com/jstip31.htm http://www.cgiscript.net/cgi-script/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=js_misc%2edb&command=viewone&id=60 http://www.cgiscript.net/cgi-script/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=js_misc%2edb&command=viewone&id=59&op From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Wed Nov 2 15:11:07 2005 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Wed Nov 2 16:15:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Question on blocking view of source on a web page References: Message-ID: <4$Iyhgq$p58g@eisner.encompasserve.org> In article , "Mr K. Mean" <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> writes: > Frog Prince wrote: >> We're using DreamweaverMX and would like to prevent a visitor and competitor >> from viewing, copying, pirating the web site code. >> >> We would also like to block access to the underlying files. We do want to >> allow the visitor to print the data to hard copy but we do not want to allow >> anyone to download the digital files. >> >> Is there a practical way to prevent coping? If not is there some way to >> make the deed harder to accomplish? >> >> Last I'm looking for an effective way to watermark or tag all the files so >> that we can substantiate copy right violations. > > You could try some of the javascript encryption scripts. ...at the cost of not offering your web site to those who have secured their browsers. From pantheus at suespammers.org Wed Nov 2 13:37:07 2005 From: pantheus at suespammers.org (Ken Knull) Date: Wed Nov 2 16:40:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Question on blocking view of source on a web page References: <4$Iyhgq$p58g@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: On Wed, 02 Nov 2005 15:11:07 -0600, Larry Kilgallen wrote: > In article , "Mr K. Mean" > <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> writes: >> Frog Prince wrote: >>> We're using DreamweaverMX and would like to prevent a visitor and >>> competitor from viewing, copying, pirating the web site code. >>> >>> We would also like to block access to the underlying files. We do want >>> to allow the visitor to print the data to hard copy but we do not want >>> to allow anyone to download the digital files. >>> >>> Is there a practical way to prevent coping? If not is there some way >>> to make the deed harder to accomplish? >>> >>> Last I'm looking for an effective way to watermark or tag all the files >>> so that we can substantiate copy right violations. >> >> You could try some of the javascript encryption scripts. > > ...at the cost of not offering your web site to those who have secured > their browsers. The ONLY way to prevent copying, viewing, and pirating .. is to NOT put the data ON the wild wild web, period, end of that story. There are ways to slow it down, or prevent the totally uninitiated from doing so, with javascript and other scripts, but all have some downsides. There are also ways to prevent javascript from disabling YOUR own ability to block as is referred to here: > ."..at the cost of not offering your web site to those who have > secured their browsers." and that is to use a late model Firefox browser with the RefControl extension. With that you can block a LOT of things, yet be selective as to where it isn't blocked. Example .. I block globally, javascript, redirects, and a lot of things related to Referrer but allow it to not be blocked on /some/ totally trustworthy (to me) sites. As to watermarking ... there have been, over the years, many such applications .. but all of them, to my knowledge, are break-able, by use of ImageMajic, PhotoShop or Photo Impact and some skills. Again, if it isn't a desire to have it copied, stolen or otherwise used then DON'T put it 'up' there. Noobies can be slowed down, somnehwat, but one with skills and desire can take them, no matter what you do. Ken -- In a world without walls and fences nobody needs Windows and Gates! User #104362 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org From blacklist-me at davjam.org Wed Nov 2 21:43:05 2005 From: blacklist-me at davjam.org (David Bolt) Date: Wed Nov 2 16:55:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Question on blocking view of source on a web page References: Message-ID: On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Mr K. Mean <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote:- >Frog Prince wrote: >> We're using DreamweaverMX and would like to prevent a visitor and competitor >> from viewing, copying, pirating the web site code. >> We would also like to block access to the underlying files. We do >>want to >> allow the visitor to print the data to hard copy but we do not want to allow >> anyone to download the digital files. >> Is there a practical way to prevent coping? Apart from not putting the files up so they can be viewed? No. To be viewed, they have to be downloaded. The only way to >>If not is there some way to >> make the deed harder to accomplish? Not really. Once a page has been downloaded by the browser, it's going to be stored in the browser cache. From there it can be viewed, edited, or printed, just as if it were a locally produced file. On top of that, since any graphics associated with the page are downloaded so they can be viewed as part of the page, they can be printed, edited, or viewed, without reference to the original HTML source. >> Last I'm looking for an effective way to watermark or tag all the >>files so >> that we can substantiate copy right violations. Graphics can be watermarked, and so can be more easily protected. It's going to be much harder to prove that a page source was copied as you're likely to find someone producing a similar layout, and using the same software to produce the page(s), will end up with similar HTML source code. >You could try some of the javascript encryption scripts. I haven't >tried them so I'm not sure how they might work or how well, but: > >http://www.felgall.com/jstip31.htm >http://www.cgiscript.net/cgi-script/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=js_misc% >2edb&command=viewone&id=60 >http://www.cgiscript.net/cgi-script/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=js_misc% >2edb&command=viewone&id=59&op Even Javascript encryption won't stop someone determined to look at your page source, although it might stop someone who doesn't know how to decode them. Or who haven't heard about DOM inspection plug-ins[0] that will have the browser render the page and then display the final results. [0] Used to have one of these to decrypt the pages given in spams. The problem was the only available plug-in, at the time I bothered doing this amount of tracking, was for IE and I stopped using that as a browser due to the number of its security flaws. Regards, David Bolt -- Member of Team Acorn checking nodes at 50 Mnodes/s: http://www.distributed.net/ AMD1800 1Gb WinXP/SuSE 9.3 | AMD1300 512Mb SuSE 9.0 | AMD2400 256Mb SuSE 9.0 AMD2400 192Mb SuSE 10.0 | Falcon 14Mb TOS 4.02 | STE 4Mb TOS 1.62 RPC600 129Mb RISCOS 3.6 | A3010 4Mb RISCOS 3.11 | A4000 4Mb RISCOS 3.11 From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Wed Nov 2 22:10:22 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Wed Nov 2 17:15:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Question on blocking view of source on a web page In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: David Bolt wrote: > On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Mr K. Mean <35zyuhr02@sneakemail.com> wrote:- > > Even Javascript encryption won't stop someone determined to look at your > page source, although it might stop someone who doesn't know how to > decode them. Or who haven't heard about DOM inspection plug-ins[0] that > will have the browser render the page and then display the final > results. I originally started out writing that nothing could be done, that disabling the right click view source was just an annoying ineffective trick that doesn't stop anybody, until I realized it was possible to encrypt the source. But yeah, ultimately, if a browser is going to be able to render it, if you are going to make the pages publicly accessible, then somebody with a moderate amount of technical ability will be able to read them despite your best efforts. From user at domain.invalid Thu Nov 3 07:49:22 2005 From: user at domain.invalid (User) Date: Thu Nov 3 08:50:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Question on blocking view of source on a web page In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 02.11.2005 11:00, Frog Prince wrote: --- Original Message --- > We're using DreamweaverMX and would like to prevent a visitor and competitor > from viewing, copying, pirating the web site code. > > We would also like to block access to the underlying files. We do want to > allow the visitor to print the data to hard copy but we do not want to allow > anyone to download the digital files. > > Is there a practical way to prevent coping? If not is there some way to > make the deed harder to accomplish? > > Last I'm looking for an effective way to watermark or tag all the files so > that we can substantiate copy right violations > > FP > brother_rabbit @ hotmail.com > > After reading the many responses to your question, my conclusion is to just leave it alone, as-is. The more you try to lock your site, the more the "script kiddies" are going to attempt to UNLock it and they usually don't stop there, they try other things as they've found a "challenge" ... :-( From BNRAGMAOKKXT at spammotel.com Thu Nov 3 14:20:59 2005 From: BNRAGMAOKKXT at spammotel.com (Canopus) Date: Thu Nov 3 09:25:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Question on blocking view of source on a web page References: <4$Iyhgq$p58g@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: Ken Knull on 02/11/2005 wrote: >As to watermarking ... there have been, over the years, many such >applications .. but all of them, to my knowledge, are break-able, by use >of ImageMajic, PhotoShop or Photo Impact and some skills. There are services that embed watermarks and register them, the water marks cannot be seen, but, can be read with the correct software. Unfortunately, if someone downloads the image, opens it full screen then takes a screen shot of it they can make an almost perfect copy without the embedded watermark. -- Rob http://www.flickr.com/photos/canopus_archives/ From kenbrody at spamcop.net Thu Nov 3 14:25:24 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Thu Nov 3 15:00:11 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Question on blocking view of source on a web page References: <4$Iyhgq$p58g@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: <436A6424.CF2519B8@spamcop.net> Canopus wrote: > > Ken Knull on 02/11/2005 wrote: > > >As to watermarking ... there have been, over the years, many such > >applications .. but all of them, to my knowledge, are break-able, by use > >of ImageMajic, PhotoShop or Photo Impact and some skills. > > There are services that embed watermarks and register them, the water > marks cannot be seen, but, can be read with the correct software. > Unfortunately, if someone downloads the image, opens it full screen then > takes a screen shot of it they can make an almost perfect copy without the > embedded watermark. Wouldn't loading an image into an editor, increasing the contrast by 1, and saving the result, eliminate the waterwark? -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From nobody at nowhere.invalid Thu Nov 3 22:38:59 2005 From: nobody at nowhere.invalid (Steven Maesslein) Date: Thu Nov 3 16:40:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Question on blocking view of source on a web page References: <4$Iyhgq$p58g@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: On Wed, 02 Nov 2005 13:37:07 -0800, Ken Knull coughed into spamcop.geeks and left this in : > The ONLY way to prevent copying, viewing, and pirating .. is to NOT put > the data ON the wild wild web, period, end of that story. Amen to that. -- Steve QOTD - "It was so cold last Winter that I even saw a lawyer with his hands in his own pockets" From bud at telus.net Fri Nov 4 15:55:34 2005 From: bud at telus.net (Bud) Date: Fri Nov 4 19:00:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Uninstall Office 2003 Message-ID: I want to uninstall MS Office 2003 and remove all traces of it. Add/Remove will not allow it. The program has been acting up and producing error screens/cannot access/shortcut invalid/ and generally being a pain. I have the CD but it won't even let me reinstall. How do I remove this program from C drive so I can use the CD for a new install. The present install has been in for a year and has all the updates/security patches/and whatever else MS considered necessary. I just went along with them. In add/remove, I tried to remove/change updates and the entire program but it won't budge. For sure I need help. A reformat is not something I'm looking forward to. Thank you, -- Bud From post.please.this.email.is.not.valid at example.com Fri Nov 4 18:29:58 2005 From: post.please.this.email.is.not.valid at example.com (DougW) Date: Fri Nov 4 19:30:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Uninstall Office 2003 References: Message-ID: Bud did pass the time by typing: > I want to uninstall MS Office 2003 and remove all traces of it. Add/Remove > will not allow it. The program has been acting up and producing error > screens/cannot access/shortcut invalid/ and generally being a pain. I have > the CD but it won't even let me reinstall. > How do I remove this program from C drive so I can use the CD for a new > install. > The present install has been in for a year and has all the updates/security > patches/and whatever else MS considered necessary. I just went along with > them. In add/remove, I tried to remove/change updates and the entire program > but it won't budge. > For sure I need help. A reformat is not something I'm looking forward to. > Thank you, http://support.microsoft.com/off2003/?sid=685 http://www.kbalertz.com/kb_903771.aspx The second link is probably better. -- DougW From bait-423c86b2-42ff9001 at good.julianhaight.com Fri Nov 4 23:01:47 2005 From: bait-423c86b2-42ff9001 at good.julianhaight.com (Chris F. Willoughby) Date: Sat Nov 5 02:05:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: DVD-R vs DVD+R References: Message-ID: Personally, I like to buy my cookies at the grocery store. *gd&r* Chris "Brian" wrote in message news:dk9qk3$gk9$1@news.spamcop.net... > There's something else going on as well, cause I didn't accept a cookie > from them and it was my first time there. I very seldom accept cookies. > > -- > Brian > SC.10.myspamgobbler@spamcowboy.net From bud at telus.net Fri Nov 4 23:14:12 2005 From: bud at telus.net (Bud) Date: Sat Nov 5 02:15:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Uninstall Office 2003 References: Message-ID: "DougW" wrote in message news:dkgue4$o8v$1@news.spamcop.net... > Bud did pass the time by typing: >> I want to uninstall MS Office 2003 and remove all traces of it. >> Add/Remove >> will not allow it. The program has been acting up and producing error >> screens/cannot access/shortcut invalid/ and generally being a pain. I >> have >> the CD but it won't even let me reinstall. >> How do I remove this program from C drive so I can use the CD for a new >> install. >> The present install has been in for a year and has all the >> updates/security >> patches/and whatever else MS considered necessary. I just went along with >> them. In add/remove, I tried to remove/change updates and the entire >> program >> but it won't budge. >> For sure I need help. A reformat is not something I'm looking forward to. >> Thank you, > > http://support.microsoft.com/off2003/?sid=685 > http://www.kbalertz.com/kb_903771.aspx > > The second link is probably better. > > -- > DougW Thanks Doug, The second link looks to be what I'm looking for. I'll work on it first thing tomorrow and report results. Much appreciated as usual. -- Bud > From BNRAGMAOKKXT at spammotel.com Sat Nov 5 12:25:49 2005 From: BNRAGMAOKKXT at spammotel.com (Canopus) Date: Sat Nov 5 07:30:11 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Question on blocking view of source on a web page References: <4$Iyhgq$p58g@eisner.encompasserve.org> <436A6424.CF2519B8@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Kenneth Brody on 03/11/2005 wrote: >Canopus wrote: >> >>Ken Knull on 02/11/2005 wrote: >> >>>As to watermarking ... there have been, over the years, many such >>>applications .. but all of them, to my knowledge, are break-able, by use >>>of ImageMajic, PhotoShop or Photo Impact and some skills. >> >>There are services that embed watermarks and register them, the water >>marks cannot be seen, but, can be read with the correct software. >>Unfortunately, if someone downloads the image, opens it full screen then >>takes a screen shot of it they can make an almost perfect copy without the >>embedded watermark. > >Wouldn't loading an image into an editor, increasing the contrast by 1, >and saving the result, eliminate the waterwark? If it's visible I would have thought that doing that would make it more visible. If it's embedded as code and cannot be seen then it should have no effect. I'm sure water-mark registration services would have taken such basic editing into consideration. -- Rob http://www.flickr.com/photos/canopus_archives/ From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 01:04:59 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Sofa King Tyred of Lar Ting) Date: Mon Nov 7 01:05:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Usenet abuse Message-ID: Hi there, One of the newsgroups I frequent (alt.something...) has recently acquired a troll who's cross-posting his defamatory, hate-speech replies from soc.culture.israel. The spamcop engine gives an abuse address as follows: Parsing input: 213.78.80.208 host 213.78.80.208 (getting name) no name Routing details for 213.78.80.208 [refresh/show] Cached whois for 213.78.80.208 : abuse@onetel.net.uk tonybeltram@onetel.net.uk Using abuse net on abuse@onetel.net.uk abuse net onetel.net.uk = abuse@onetel.net.uk, postmaster@onetel.net.uk Using best contacts abuse@onetel.net.uk postmaster@onetel.net.uk Statistics: 213.78.80.208 not listed in bl.spamcop.net More Information.. 213.78.80.208 not listed in dnsbl.njabl.org 213.78.80.208 not listed in dnsbl.njabl.org 213.78.80.208 not listed in cbl.abuseat.org 213.78.80.208 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net ( 127.0.0.10 ) 213.78.80.208 not listed in relays.ordb.org. Reporting addresses: abuse@onetel.net.uk postmaster@onetel.net.uk The TOS of onetel forbids any kind of defamatory web pages, etc. from being posted on their web space, but I'm perhaps stretching it to claim that they need to enforce that for usenet. I have cited their TOS in my LARTs. So far, I've got no response from the abuse folks, apart from emails bouncing on the abuse address after a few days of temporary failures (some days ago). I'm not sure if now it's working - no bounces, but no effect either. In any case, the troll lives for weeks on this IP space. Don't think it's zombie pilot, unless it's a botnet on the same ISP. Anyway, his style of profanity seems to be consistent with someone from the UK ;-) What are the odds that by reporting him this way, I will get him shut down? I do realize that kill files and such are a better way to go, but I'm curious since I have fought a lot of email abuse (spam) and had results. This is my first attempt at going after a hate-speech cross-posting troll. It appears he may be trying to win a kook award or something, or perhaps someone that reads that group did something to irritate him and he's getting revenge somehow. -- Help fight spam by "educating" the lax, zombie-hosting ISPs: http://pages.infinit.net/filmore/educateYourISP.htm From nobody at nowhere.invalid Mon Nov 7 11:22:58 2005 From: nobody at nowhere.invalid (Steven Maesslein) Date: Mon Nov 7 05:25:22 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Usenet abuse References: Message-ID: On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 01:04:59 -0500, Sofa King Tyred of Lar Ting coughed into spamcop.geeks and left this in : > What are the odds that by reporting him this way, I will get him shut > down? >From onetel.net.uk? I'd say approaching zero from negative values. Onetel is a telco, like BT, wanadoo (France Telecom), China Telecom, MCI et al. 'Nuff said. -- Steve QUARK: The sound made by a well-bred duck: From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 08:42:31 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 7 08:45:05 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Help Goddammmmitt! Message-ID: I finally purchased a new cable modem for my home PC, thinking it would solve my connection problems. No dice. My computer will still not connect to the internet when I boot up unless I run "ipconfig /renew". Comcast can't ping me and I can't make a connection unless I do that, even though ipconfig shows that I have a valid IP address. Comcast tech was useless trying to help me, bitched because I had Win2000 and he only knew the XP operating system, told me something was screwed up with either my computer or ethernet card settings (which is probably true) but he could do nothing about it. I fooled around with the settings for my network connection and enabled several DNS type services in administrative tools, but still no joy (I had disabled a bunch of stuff related to networking for safety since I don't have a home LAN). What should I do? Delete the ethernet card hardware profile and reinstall it? I'm really stuck here......what is causing this? From MikeE at ster.invalid Mon Nov 7 06:32:14 2005 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Mon Nov 7 09:35:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > cable modem > My computer will still > not connect to the internet when I boot up unless I run "ipconfig > /renew". Comcast can't ping me and I can't make a connection unless I > do that, even though ipconfig shows that I have a valid IP address. > don't have a home LAN). I'm not 2K but 98. Your network config should obtain its IP automatically, and use DHCP, and disable DNS - unless you have an alternate strategy. If you are using a Client, you should decide how to have it logon, such as "The primary network logon is the client that is used to validate your user name and password, process any login scripts, and perform other startup tasks." In a simplistic setup, that could well be the windows logon. Then, that logon function has Properties - where you can choose for example Quick logon as opposed to a log on to a windows NT domain.. If you were dialup before, you need to be sure that your apps aren't configured to use the dialup connxns. In OE that is done in the various mail or news accounts in the Properties/ Connection section and in IE it is in Tools/ Oiptions/ Connections. There's also an internet connxn wizard available there. Many modems have a webpage diagnostic tool built into them by accessing something like http://192.168.100.1/startup.html or just the http IP without any startup.html. If your network config is as above, then your troubleshooting could start by powering down the modem and the pc. Powerup the modem and let the lights get situated, that lets the modem get itself an IP and be prepared to dole it out to someone, ie a MAC address. Then powerup the computer so that it can be the MAC somone who gets the IP. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 10:03:23 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 7 10:05:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Your network config should obtain its IP automatically, and use DHCP, > and disable DNS - unless you have an alternate strategy. If you are > using a Client, you should decide how to have it logon, such as "The > primary network logon is the client that is used to validate your user > name and password, process any login scripts, and perform other > startup tasks." In a simplistic setup, that could well be the > windows logon. Then, that logon function has Properties - where you > can choose for example Quick logon as opposed to a log on to a > windows NT domain.. Everything worked fine until I downloaded a bunch of windows patches several months ago and I disabled some "sharing" services for safety. I did have DNS disabled, I enabled it, still no joy. My card is setup to obtain an IP automatically. I wonder if the TCP/IP stuff is borked? > > If you were dialup before, you need to be sure that your apps aren't > configured to use the dialup connxns. Haven't had dialup in over 5 years.....this just sprung up out of the blue. From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 10:07:00 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Nov 7 10:20:16 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Uninstall Norton Internet Security (was Re: Uninstall Office 2003) References: Message-ID: <436F6D94.3269F2A6@spamcop.net> DougW wrote: > > Bud did pass the time by typing: > > I want to uninstall MS Office 2003 and remove all traces of it. Add/Remove > > will not allow it. The program has been acting up and producing error > > screens/cannot access/shortcut invalid/ and generally being a pain. I have > > the CD but it won't even let me reinstall. [...] > > For sure I need help. A reformat is not something I'm looking forward to. > > Thank you, > > http://support.microsoft.com/off2003/?sid=685 > http://www.kbalertz.com/kb_903771.aspx > > The second link is probably better. Any pointers on removing a hosed Norton Internet Security? In the past month, we have gotten _several_ systems in which Norton Internet Security was hosed. (Probably by a worm/trojan/virus/whatever.) Upon system startup, you would get several program crash messages, and numerous programs would be unable to access the internet. NIS would refuse to unstall due to a missing file (unfortunately, I didn't write down the name), and a fresh install would refuse to run as it couldn't uninstall the currently-installed version. I mananged to disable NIS on the systems by finding all of the numerous registry entries that loaded it, but there's still no way to install it or get a working version installed. Any pointers like the above will be greatly appreciated. -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 10:16:24 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Nov 7 10:20:18 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: <436F6FC8.79C260F6@spamcop.net> indigo wrote: > > I finally purchased a new cable modem for my home PC, thinking it would > solve my connection problems. No dice. My computer will still not connect to > the internet when I boot up unless I run "ipconfig /renew". Comcast can't > ping me and I can't make a connection unless I do that, even though ipconfig > shows that I have a valid IP address. Note that you will have "a valid IP address" even if the cable modem is off. (Unless it's a USB connection, in which case you don't have a network interface unless the modem is on.) If DHCP is on, and it fails to talk to the DHCP server, you will be assigned a fallback address. This will be indicated by an IP address of 169.254.nnn.nnn rather than the usual DHCP address of 192.168.0.nnn http://homepage.ntlworld.com/robin.d.h.walker/cmtips/badip.html#ip169 Given that an "ipconfig /renew" works, it sounds like it may be that your system is trying to talk to the DHCP server before it's ready. Can you turn on the cable modem first, and wait until all of its lights indicate that it's ready, before booting your system? (My in-laws' system has the modem and the computer on a power strip, and they are both turned on at the same time. However, the modem always finishes its startup and goes ready before the XP logon screen appears.) > Comcast tech was useless trying to help me, bitched because I had Win2000 > and he only knew the XP operating system, told me something was screwed up > with either my computer or ethernet card settings (which is probably true) > but he could do nothing about it. I fooled around with the settings for my > network connection and enabled several DNS type services in administrative > tools, but still no joy (I had disabled a bunch of stuff related to > networking for safety since I don't have a home LAN). > > What should I do? Delete the ethernet card hardware profile and reinstall > it? I'm really stuck here......what is causing this? -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 10:31:07 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 7 10:35:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: <436F6FC8.79C260F6@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Kenneth Brody wrote: > Note that you will have "a valid IP address" even if the cable modem > is off. (Unless it's a USB connection, in which case you don't have > a network interface unless the modem is on.) If DHCP is on, and it > fails to talk to the DHCP server, you will be assigned a fallback > address. This will be indicated by an IP address of 169.254.nnn.nnn > rather than the usual DHCP address of 192.168.0.nnn > Nope, I had a "real" IP address according to the tech. > > http://homepage.ntlworld.com/robin.d.h.walker/cmtips/badip.html#ip169 > > Given that an "ipconfig /renew" works, it sounds like it may be that > your system is trying to talk to the DHCP server before it's ready. > Can you turn on the cable modem first, and wait until all of its > lights indicate that it's ready, before booting your system? (My > in-laws' system has the modem and the computer on a power strip, and > they are both turned on at the same time. However, the modem always > finishes its startup and goes ready before the XP logon screen > appears.) > Same here, everything plugged into one master power strip. Modem is up and running at least 30-40 seconds before Windows loads fully. From post.please.this.email.is.not.valid at example.com Mon Nov 7 09:52:42 2005 From: post.please.this.email.is.not.valid at example.com (DougW) Date: Mon Nov 7 10:55:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: indigo did pass the time by typing: > I finally purchased a new cable modem for my home PC, thinking it would > solve my connection problems. No dice. My computer will still not connect to > the internet when I boot up unless I run "ipconfig /renew". Comcast can't > ping me and I can't make a connection unless I do that, even though ipconfig > shows that I have a valid IP address. > > Comcast tech was useless trying to help me, bitched because I had Win2000 > and he only knew the XP operating system, told me something was screwed up > with either my computer or ethernet card settings (which is probably true) > but he could do nothing about it. I fooled around with the settings for my > network connection and enabled several DNS type services in administrative > tools, but still no joy (I had disabled a bunch of stuff related to > networking for safety since I don't have a home LAN). > > What should I do? Delete the ethernet card hardware profile and reinstall > it? I'm really stuck here......what is causing this? Been too long since I mucked about with 2k. However, http://techrepublic.com.com/1200-26-5124039.html should have something. IIRC the problem is in adapter (tcp/ip) and wins settings, but as I said, it's been a while. -- DougW From SC.10.myspamgobbler at spamcowboy.net Mon Nov 7 07:51:15 2005 From: SC.10.myspamgobbler at spamcowboy.net (Brian) Date: Mon Nov 7 10:55:06 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Uninstall Norton Internet Security (was Re: Uninstall Office 2003) In-Reply-To: <436F6D94.3269F2A6@spamcop.net> References: <436F6D94.3269F2A6@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Kenneth Brody wrote: > > Any pointers on removing a hosed Norton Internet Security? > > In the past month, we have gotten _several_ systems in which Norton > Internet Security was hosed. (Probably by a worm/trojan/virus/whatever.) > Upon system startup, you would get several program crash messages, and > numerous programs would be unable to access the internet. NIS would > refuse to unstall due to a missing file (unfortunately, I didn't write > down the name), and a fresh install would refuse to run as it couldn't > uninstall the currently-installed version. > > I mananged to disable NIS on the systems by finding all of the numerous > registry entries that loaded it, but there's still no way to install it > or get a working version installed. > > Any pointers like the above will be greatly appreciated. > If you've removed all registry entries (search for Symantec as well) you should be able to reinstall, but not sure why you'd want to. You've stated that it was hosed on several systems. I encourage my new clients to let me uninstall it and install the group of security software that has been keeping my clients computers malware free for a long time. They are free (unless you want the paid versions) and operate with less resource usage and don't come with the problems. -- Brian SC.10.myspamgobbler@spamcowboy.net From SC.10.myspamgobbler at spamcowboy.net Mon Nov 7 08:04:17 2005 From: SC.10.myspamgobbler at spamcowboy.net (Brian) Date: Mon Nov 7 11:10:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > I finally purchased a new cable modem for my home PC, thinking it would > solve my connection problems. No dice. My computer will still not connect to > the internet when I boot up unless I run "ipconfig /renew". Comcast can't > ping me and I can't make a connection unless I do that, even though ipconfig > shows that I have a valid IP address. > > Comcast tech was useless trying to help me, bitched because I had Win2000 > and he only knew the XP operating system, told me something was screwed up > with either my computer or ethernet card settings (which is probably true) > but he could do nothing about it. I fooled around with the settings for my > network connection and enabled several DNS type services in administrative > tools, but still no joy (I had disabled a bunch of stuff related to > networking for safety since I don't have a home LAN). > > What should I do? Delete the ethernet card hardware profile and reinstall > it? I'm really stuck here......what is causing this? > > There's a couple of possibilities. Most likely in the TCP/IP configuration, but let me ask first if you have a router? -- Brian SC.10.myspamgobbler@spamcowboy.net From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 11:55:08 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 7 12:00:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: Brian wrote: > > There's a couple of possibilities. Most likely in the TCP/IP > configuration, but let me ask first if you have a router? No. I'm half tempted to take screen shots of the "advanced" settings and all related stuff for my config and post them here for folks to look at, but that's not considered kosher on these groups. From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 12:16:04 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Nov 7 12:25:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: <436F6FC8.79C260F6@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <436F8BD4.29A5ACA5@spamcop.net> indigo wrote: > > Kenneth Brody wrote: > > Note that you will have "a valid IP address" even if the cable modem > > is off. (Unless it's a USB connection, in which case you don't have > > a network interface unless the modem is on.) If DHCP is on, and it > > fails to talk to the DHCP server, you will be assigned a fallback > > address. This will be indicated by an IP address of 169.254.nnn.nnn > > rather than the usual DHCP address of 192.168.0.nnn > > > > Nope, I had a "real" IP address according to the tech. Was he looking at your computer's IP, or the modem's IP? (How is your computer connected? Via a network card in your system, or USB?) If you drop to a command prompt (start/run/"cmd"), what is the output of the commands "route print" and "ipconfig"? (Prior to "ipconfig /renew" and after.) [...] -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 12:17:12 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Nov 7 12:25:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: <436F8C18.166BC42A@spamcop.net> indigo wrote: > > Brian wrote: > > > > There's a couple of possibilities. Most likely in the TCP/IP > > configuration, but let me ask first if you have a router? > > No. I'm half tempted to take screen shots of the "advanced" settings and all > related stuff for my config and post them here for folks to look at, but > that's not considered kosher on these groups. You can put them on an http or ftp site and post the URL. -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 12:21:38 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Nov 7 12:25:10 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Uninstall Norton Internet Security (was Re: Uninstall Office2003) References: <436F6D94.3269F2A6@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <436F8D22.84AEB5BF@spamcop.net> Brian wrote: > > Kenneth Brody wrote: > > > > > Any pointers on removing a hosed Norton Internet Security? > > > > In the past month, we have gotten _several_ systems in which Norton > > Internet Security was hosed. (Probably by a worm/trojan/virus/whatever.) > > Upon system startup, you would get several program crash messages, and > > numerous programs would be unable to access the internet. NIS would > > refuse to unstall due to a missing file (unfortunately, I didn't write > > down the name), and a fresh install would refuse to run as it couldn't > > uninstall the currently-installed version. > > > > I mananged to disable NIS on the systems by finding all of the numerous > > registry entries that loaded it, but there's still no way to install it > > or get a working version installed. > > > > Any pointers like the above will be greatly appreciated. > > > > If you've removed all registry entries (search for Symantec as well) you > should be able to reinstall, but not sure why you'd want to. You've > stated that it was hosed on several systems. Well, they're not my systems, so I don't really have the final say. (These are "clients" on in the sense that they brought their systems in for a cleanup because of the ad we ran, as opposed to systems that we manage full-time.) > I encourage my new clients to let me uninstall it and install the group > of security software that has been keeping my clients computers malware > free for a long time. They are free (unless you want the paid versions) > and operate with less resource usage and don't come with the problems. Well, at the point that they brought them in, NIS was in a state that it couldn't uninstall itself. Basically, I've disabled it, rather than uninstall it. And it's still "installed" as far as its own install is concerned. For all I know, other programs won't install because they see NIS installed. BTW, what suite of utilities to you use? -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From SC.10.myspamgobbler at spamcowboy.net Mon Nov 7 09:33:01 2005 From: SC.10.myspamgobbler at spamcowboy.net (Brian) Date: Mon Nov 7 12:40:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Brian wrote: >> There's a couple of possibilities. Most likely in the TCP/IP >> configuration, but let me ask first if you have a router? > > No. I'm half tempted to take screen shots of the "advanced" settings and all > related stuff for my config and post them here for folks to look at, but > that's not considered kosher on these groups. > > I have an online help desk and could come take a look at your computer if you'd like. -- Brian SC.10.myspamgobbler@spamcowboy.net From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 12:47:05 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 7 12:50:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: <436F6FC8.79C260F6@spamcop.net> <436F8BD4.29A5ACA5@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Kenneth Brody wrote: > > Was he looking at your computer's IP, or the modem's IP? (How is your > computer connected? Via a network card in your system, or USB?) I ran ipconfig and read the numbers to him over the phone, it was a valid Comcast IP. Cable modem is connected directly to the cable, and I'm using the ethernet port, not the USB port. He couldn't ping me until I ran ipconfig /renew, said something is blocking the modem from making a connection. From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 12:49:13 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 7 12:50:05 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: Brian wrote: > indigo wrote: > > Brian wrote: > >> There's a couple of possibilities. Most likely in the TCP/IP > >> configuration, but let me ask first if you have a router? > > > > No. I'm half tempted to take screen shots of the "advanced" > > settings and all related stuff for my config and post them here for > > folks to look at, but that's not considered kosher on these groups. > > > > > I have an online help desk and could come take a look at your computer > if you'd like. Thanks for the offer, but if it comes to that I'm friends with several guys in the IT group here, I'd ask them to come over to my house claiming it's a work problem and I can't VPN in ;-) From MikeE at ster.invalid Mon Nov 7 09:49:30 2005 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Mon Nov 7 12:50:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > No. I'm half tempted to take screen shots of the "advanced" settings > and all related stuff for my config and post them here for folks to > look at, but that's not considered kosher on these groups. IMO 'anything' can be posted into spamcop.spam, including binary attachments, and I have. But, that's just my philosophy. .spam doesn't go out on the mailman mailing list or get archived to pipermail or gmane distributed. And, not very many people read there.. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 12:55:34 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 7 13:00:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > indigo wrote: > > > No. I'm half tempted to take screen shots of the "advanced" settings > > and all related stuff for my config and post them here for folks to > > look at, but that's not considered kosher on these groups. > > IMO 'anything' can be posted into spamcop.spam, including binary > attachments, and I have. > > But, that's just my philosophy. .spam doesn't go out on the mailman > mailing list or get archived to pipermail or gmane distributed. And, > not very many people read there.. good point, I forgot about that. What would you (or anyone) like to see, specifically, for troubleshooting this? From SC.10.myspamgobbler at spamcowboy.net Mon Nov 7 09:55:59 2005 From: SC.10.myspamgobbler at spamcowboy.net (Brian) Date: Mon Nov 7 13:00:06 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! In-Reply-To: References: <436F6FC8.79C260F6@spamcop.net> <436F8BD4.29A5ACA5@spamcop.net> Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Kenneth Brody wrote: >> Was he looking at your computer's IP, or the modem's IP? (How is your >> computer connected? Via a network card in your system, or USB?) > > I ran ipconfig and read the numbers to him over the phone, it was a valid > Comcast IP. Cable modem is connected directly to the cable, and I'm using > the ethernet port, not the USB port. > > He couldn't ping me until I ran ipconfig /renew, said something is blocking > the modem from making a connection. > > You could uninstall the network card and start all over. This will often fix problems like this. But before you do that, run LSPfix http://www.cexx.org/lspfix.htm and see if that helps. -- Brian SC.10.myspamgobbler@spamcowboy.net From SC.10.myspamgobbler at spamcowboy.net Mon Nov 7 10:16:09 2005 From: SC.10.myspamgobbler at spamcowboy.net (Brian) Date: Mon Nov 7 13:20:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Uninstall Norton Internet Security (was Re: Uninstall Office2003) In-Reply-To: <436F8D22.84AEB5BF@spamcop.net> References: <436F6D94.3269F2A6@spamcop.net> <436F8D22.84AEB5BF@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Kenneth Brody wrote: > Brian wrote: >> Kenneth Brody wrote: >> >>> Any pointers on removing a hosed Norton Internet Security? >>> >>> In the past month, we have gotten _several_ systems in which Norton >>> Internet Security was hosed. (Probably by a worm/trojan/virus/whatever.) >>> Upon system startup, you would get several program crash messages, and >>> numerous programs would be unable to access the internet. NIS would >>> refuse to unstall due to a missing file (unfortunately, I didn't write >>> down the name), and a fresh install would refuse to run as it couldn't >>> uninstall the currently-installed version. >>> >>> I mananged to disable NIS on the systems by finding all of the numerous >>> registry entries that loaded it, but there's still no way to install it >>> or get a working version installed. >>> >>> Any pointers like the above will be greatly appreciated. >>> >> If you've removed all registry entries (search for Symantec as well) you >> should be able to reinstall, but not sure why you'd want to. You've >> stated that it was hosed on several systems. > > Well, they're not my systems, so I don't really have the final say. > (These are "clients" on in the sense that they brought their systems > in for a cleanup because of the ad we ran, as opposed to systems that > we manage full-time.) > You clean up computers but cant remove NIS? How is it that you are able to clean up malware that makes it difficult to get rid of? Just running various AVs or Antispyware is not good enough. My clients are similar. I usually don't manage them all that much, other than to give support once I'm done with my process. I do all this with my online help desk, working on them over the Internet, though I do have local customers that bring their machines to me if they can't get online or have dial-up connections. >> I encourage my new clients to let me uninstall it and install the group >> of security software that has been keeping my clients computers malware >> free for a long time. They are free (unless you want the paid versions) >> and operate with less resource usage and don't come with the problems. > > Well, at the point that they brought them in, NIS was in a state that it > couldn't uninstall itself. Basically, I've disabled it, rather than > uninstall it. > > And it's still "installed" as far as its own install is concerned. For > all I know, other programs won't install because they see NIS installed. > I don't understand why you can't uninstall it. And it sounds like not just one, but several. Did you try doing a repair? > BTW, what suite of utilities to you use? > -- Brian SC.10.myspamgobbler@spamcowboy.net From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 16:12:34 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 7 16:15:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: <436F6FC8.79C260F6@spamcop.net> <436F8BD4.29A5ACA5@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Brian wrote: > > > > You could uninstall the network card and start all over. This will > often fix problems like this. I'm thinking of doing that. I assume that after I remove it using the hardware/remove utility, I reboot and Windows will detect the card and find a driver? I better make sure I have the CD ROM that came with my MoBo before I do this, correct? But before you do that, run LSPfix > http://www.cexx.org/lspfix.htm and see if that helps. Erm, don't think I'll be using that proggie, looks like more trouble than I want to get into......(I use AdAware) ** IMPORTANT ** There is a known issue with using this software in combination with obsolete versions of Lavasoft's popular AD-Aware utility. A known issue in some versions of AD-Aware results in improper removal of pests such as New.Net, CommonName, and WebHancer, resulting in lost Internet access. If LSP-Fix is used subsequently to repair these errors, the system may begin exhibiting crashes in MSAFD.DLL and/or RPCSS. This can be fixed by performing a "hard restore" of Windows' networking components. This involves uninstalling the "Communications" item in Windows setup, deleting the Winsock2 registry key, and reinstalling Communications. http://support.earthlink.net/mu/1/psc/img/walkthroughs/windows_9x_nt/dialers/dun_1.3/5289.psc.html explains this procedure in detail. If you have additional information about what this version of AD-Aware does to mess up Winsock, or have a system this has happened on that doesn't need to be repaired immediately, please email me: winsock "at" cexx.org so I can figure out what is going on and fix it. I have so far been unable to reproduce this issue, and consequently, unable to update LSP-Fix to deal with it. From 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com Mon Nov 7 22:14:41 2005 From: 35zyuhr02 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Mon Nov 7 16:15:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Kenneth Loafman wrote: > > I don't have a solution either, except that Verizon has just laid fiber in > my neighborhood, so the solution may be for me to switch ISP's. Comcast > tech support is useless since all I have is Linux at home. Talk about a > case of monopoly support. They won't even talk to you unless you run that > piece of trash from Redmond. You know, you don't have to tell them though. How many times have I said, yes, I have Windows, umm, yeah, I'm rebooting, it is just restarting now. Ok, rebooted now (as I'm typing ifconfig eth0 down, and so on). From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 16:15:30 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 7 16:20:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: Kenneth Loafman wrote: > > I'm on Comcast as well and have been having similar problems. I've > read through all the messages so far, and I think you're seeing the > same thing I am. I'll have a 'valid' address at the router, but the > lease time will have expired. At that point, nothing goes out. If I > do get a lease, most of the time its for 4 days, but sometimes I get > a lease for only 1 hour and have to reset the router to get another > one. This normally occurs on a Sunday morning for me (5-8am CST). > The rest of the time, I either don't notice it, or it's not acting up > then. > Huh. Interesting.....but still shitty for me and you. Comcast tech support is useless since all I have is Linux at > home. Talk about a case of monopoly support. They won't even talk > to you unless you run that piece of trash from Redmond. No kidding. The second idiot I talked to over the phone actually spent 5 minutes trying to convince me to upgrade to XP to solve the problem! Because he knew nothing about Win2K. Like the TCP/IP crap is dealt with any differently......it isn't, right? From SC.10.myspamgobbler at spamcowboy.net Mon Nov 7 13:20:46 2005 From: SC.10.myspamgobbler at spamcowboy.net (Brian) Date: Mon Nov 7 16:25:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! In-Reply-To: References: <436F6FC8.79C260F6@spamcop.net> <436F8BD4.29A5ACA5@spamcop.net> Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Brian wrote: >> You could uninstall the network card and start all over. This will >> often fix problems like this. > > I'm thinking of doing that. I assume that after I remove it using the > hardware/remove utility, I reboot and Windows will detect the card and find > a driver? I better make sure I have the CD ROM that came with my MoBo before > I do this, correct? > You will need your Win2k disk is all. > But before you do that, run LSPfix >> http://www.cexx.org/lspfix.htm and see if that helps. > > Erm, don't think I'll be using that proggie, looks like more trouble than I > want to get into......(I use AdAware) > > ** IMPORTANT ** > There is a known issue with using this software in combination with *obsolete* > versions of Lavasoft's popular AD-Aware utility. A known issue in some > versions of AD-Aware results in improper removal of pests such as New.Net, > CommonName, and WebHancer, resulting in lost Internet access. If LSP-Fix is > used subsequently to repair these errors, the system may begin exhibiting > crashes in MSAFD.DLL and/or RPCSS. This can be fixed by performing a "hard > restore" of Windows' networking components. This involves uninstalling the > "Communications" item in Windows setup, deleting the Winsock2 registry key, > and reinstalling Communications. > http://support.earthlink.net/mu/1/psc/img/walkthroughs/windows_9x_nt/dialers/dun_1.3/5289.psc.html > explains this procedure in detail. > > If you have additional information about what this version of AD-Aware does > to mess up Winsock, or have a system this has happened on that doesn't need > to be repaired immediately, please email me: winsock "at" cexx.org so I can > figure out what is going on and fix it. I have so far been unable to > reproduce this issue, and consequently, unable to update LSP-Fix to deal > with it. > > I've used in on numerous computers with none of these problems. If your Ad-aware is an updated version, you shouldn't have to worry about it. -- Brian SC.10.myspamgobbler@spamcowboy.net From bud at telus.net Mon Nov 7 13:24:39 2005 From: bud at telus.net (Bud) Date: Mon Nov 7 16:25:06 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Uninstall Norton Internet Security (was Re: Uninstall Office 2003) References: <436F6D94.3269F2A6@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Kenneth Brody" wrote in message news:436F6D94.3269F2A6@spamcop.net... > > Any pointers on removing a hosed Norton Internet Security? > I mananged to disable NIS on the systems by finding all of the numerous > registry entries that loaded it, but there's still no way to install it > or get a working version installed. Some of these are "free to try". http://www.download.com/3120-20-0.html?qt=Uninstaller -- Bud From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 16:30:46 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 7 16:35:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: <436F6FC8.79C260F6@spamcop.net> <436F8BD4.29A5ACA5@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Brian wrote: > indigo wrote: > > Brian wrote: > >> You could uninstall the network card and start all over. This will > >> often fix problems like this. > > > > I'm thinking of doing that. I assume that after I remove it using > > the hardware/remove utility, I reboot and Windows will detect the > > card and find > > a driver? I better make sure I have the CD ROM that came with my > > MoBo before I do this, correct? > > > > You will need your Win2k disk is all. Is that because any old generic driver can be used? My ethernet card is actually built into my MoBo, it's not a seperate card. I was wondering whether it would need the OEM driver that came with the MoBo disk. From MikeE at ster.invalid Mon Nov 7 13:35:43 2005 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Mon Nov 7 16:40:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Like the TCP/IP crap is > dealt with any differently......it isn't, right? The XP differences don't have anything to do with your problem -- but XP has raw sockets among other differences from 2K. Raw sockets are what made Steve Gibson so 'crazy' when it first came out http://www.grc.com/dos/xpsummary.htm [That's the summary, there's a link to a longer version.] What Kenneth said about the expired lease is an interesting dilemma -- there's nothing about your configuration that fixes the problem of having/developing an expired lease. That is supposed to be taken care of by the modem and the network it is on, not manually by you. >From a troubleshooting point of view, I presume that when you run ipconfig [not renew] what you find is an expired lease, and then when you renew it everything is OK. When I look at my current lease, I see that it was obtained about 4:30 this am and expires 2 days from then. I've never had a lease expire before a new one was obtained and I don't know exactly what makes the process take care of itself so automatically. I'll have to do some reading about that. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 17:04:56 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 7 17:05:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > From a troubleshooting point of view, I presume that when you run > ipconfig [not renew] what you find is an expired lease, and then when > you renew it everything is OK. > Nope, but nice try ;-) Every time I've looked the lease has been good for another 4-7 days. That was one of the first things I checked when this started happening. You may have been the one to suggest looking at it to me, I think I posted in here about the problem when it first occurred several months ago. Or maybe it was on the Comcast online support forum...... From borgholio at storymind.com Mon Nov 7 14:21:38 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Mon Nov 7 17:25:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Mike Easter wrote: > >>From a troubleshooting point of view, I presume that when you run >>ipconfig [not renew] what you find is an expired lease, and then when >>you renew it everything is OK. >> > > > Nope, but nice try ;-) Every time I've looked the lease has been good for > another 4-7 days. That was one of the first things I checked when this > started happening. You may have been the one to suggest looking at it to me, > I think I posted in here about the problem when it first occurred several > months ago. Or maybe it was on the Comcast online support forum...... > > Well there's your problem. If you just bought the damn IP address instead of constantly renewing your lease, you'd be set. I mean it's not like you need a large down payment anyways, simply use your computer as collateral. Duh. From MikeE at ster.invalid Mon Nov 7 14:28:24 2005 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Mon Nov 7 17:30:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Nope, but nice try ;-) > Every time I've looked the lease has been good > for another 4-7 days. I don't yet have a clear picture. I'm not going to count the business of your IP not being pingable by comcast during trouble. All kinds of things don't echo pings. What happens when [during the trouble without/before using your ipconfig renew] you - try to ping your DHCP derived DNS by IP number - try to ping [or resolve] your DHCP derived DNS by its name - try to ping your gateway IP by its IP number - try to ping [or resolve] your gateway IP by its name When everything is working OK, your DNS/es can be seen with your ipconfig, and you likely have 2 or 3, so copy them down*. Do a rDNS on them and find out their name/s. Your gateway IP is your IP except the last rightmost octet is 1 instead of whatever yours is. If your own IP rDNSes, the gateway one will likely too. Make some notes of that stuff, and then the next time you are in the troubleshooting condition where it seems like you can't do anything, see if you can ping those IPs or resolve those addresses above. When I 'only' have DNS problems, not connectivity issues, I can't resolve my DNS by its name. I have had DNS 'problems' or rather just 'retardednes' in which it is 'pokey' for me to get my DNS but eventually I do. Because of that, I reconfigured my network to get some DNS from some other places besides the DHCP DNS -- but that's another story. Right now I'm not clear on whether you are actually having connectivity issues or DNS issues. * I only know what winipcfg looks like, but in 'more information' there's a little ... gizmo beside the DNS servers that you can click to see more than the first one. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 17:37:42 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 7 17:40:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: Borgholio wrote: > > Well there's your problem. If you just bought the damn IP address > instead > of constantly renewing your lease, you'd be set. I mean it's not > like you need a large down payment anyways, simply use your computer > as collateral. Duh. thanks for not helping, Borgie.....go toy with some more 419'ers, m'kay? From borgholio at storymind.com Mon Nov 7 14:38:54 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Mon Nov 7 17:40:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Borgholio wrote: > >>Well there's your problem. If you just bought the damn IP address >>instead >>of constantly renewing your lease, you'd be set. I mean it's not >>like you need a large down payment anyways, simply use your computer >>as collateral. Duh. > > > thanks for not helping, Borgie.....go toy with some more 419'ers, m'kay? > > I get more of a rise out of helping you. I mean unlike the 419'ers, you keep coming back for more. :) From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 17:42:59 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 7 17:45:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > I don't yet have a clear picture. I'm not going to count the business > of your IP not being pingable by comcast during trouble. All kinds of > things don't echo pings. > > What happens when [during the trouble without/before using your > ipconfig renew] you > > - try to ping your DHCP derived DNS by IP number > - try to ping [or resolve] your DHCP derived DNS by its name > - try to ping your gateway IP by its IP number > - try to ping [or resolve] your gateway IP by its name Erm, my eyes just glazed over reading that, Mike, this is getting to the hairy edge of my understanding of internet connectivity....I'll email this post to my home PC and see if I can make sense of it there........I assume you want me to try all of the above while I'm not connected, right? Right now I'm not clear on whether you are actually > having connectivity issues or DNS issues. > Me neither! ;-) From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 17:44:25 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 7 17:45:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: Borgholio wrote: > indigo wrote: > > Borgholio wrote: > > > >>Well there's your problem. If you just bought the damn IP address > >>instead > >>of constantly renewing your lease, you'd be set. I mean it's not > >>like you need a large down payment anyways, simply use your computer > >>as collateral. Duh. > > > > > > thanks for not helping, Borgie.....go toy with some more 419'ers, > > m'kay? > > > > > > I get more of a rise out of helping you. I mean unlike the 419'ers, > you keep coming back for more. :) You call that help? Sheesh, I wonder what you'd do if you were trying to make fun of me! From borgholio at storymind.com Mon Nov 7 14:45:32 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Mon Nov 7 17:50:11 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Borgholio wrote: > >>indigo wrote: >> >>>Borgholio wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Well there's your problem. If you just bought the damn IP address >>>>instead >>>>of constantly renewing your lease, you'd be set. I mean it's not >>>>like you need a large down payment anyways, simply use your computer >>>>as collateral. Duh. >>> >>> >>>thanks for not helping, Borgie.....go toy with some more 419'ers, >>>m'kay? >>> >>> >> >>I get more of a rise out of helping you. I mean unlike the 419'ers, >>you keep coming back for more. :) > > > You call that help? Sheesh, I wonder what you'd do if you were trying to > make fun of me! > > Hmm...I'd probably help. :-P From MikeE at ster.invalid Mon Nov 7 15:27:21 2005 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Mon Nov 7 18:30:11 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Mike Easter wrote: >> I don't yet have a clear picture. > I assume you want me to try all of the above while I'm > not connected, right? It's the connected I'm trying to figger out. You only sed indigo wrote: > My computer will still > not connect to the internet when I boot up unless I run "ipconfig > /renew". But, when people are trying to 'connect to the internet' - they are most often using an email server name or a newsserver name or a website name - and if they don't have DNS they appear to be 'dead in the water', but they actually have connectivity, just no name resolution so nothing knows where to go. In order to figure out whether or not they are connected, they have to get around the nameservice issue. So, I would want you to bootup but not use the renew ipconfig. And then see what if anything you can 'connect' to. Besides the ones I mentioned earlier, you can also use http://12.148.220.166 That is the only 'what is my IP address' that I know of that will work properly just with the http IP. > Right now I'm not clear on whether you are actually >> having connectivity issues or DNS issues. >> > > Me neither! ;-) Then, if we figger out that you are connected, but you don't have nameservice, we have a different problem to solve than if you aren't connected. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 18:56:36 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 7 19:00:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > But, when people are trying to 'connect to the internet' - they are > most often using an email server name or a newsserver name or a > website > name - and if they don't have DNS they appear to be 'dead in the > water', but they actually have connectivity, just no name resolution > so nothing knows where to go. When I boot up my PC attempts to connect to multiple places: my comcast email account (OE), my work IMAP account (Outlook), Yahoo Messenger, and the Spampal blocklists. So a bunch of different ports are being used, but none can connect. Any attempt to access a web page before ipconfig/renew gets a "cannot connect" error message, the contents of which are probably important to you if it's a DNS error message, but I can't remember the exact language at the moment. Oh, and have I mentioned that sometimes I need to run /renew several times before it works? From MikeE at ster.invalid Mon Nov 7 16:09:38 2005 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Mon Nov 7 19:10:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Mike Easter wrote: >> But, when people are trying to 'connect to the internet' - they are >> most often using an email server name or a newsserver name or a >> website >> name - and if they don't have DNS they appear to be 'dead in the >> water', but they actually have connectivity, just no name resolution >> so nothing knows where to go. > > When I boot up my PC attempts to connect to multiple places: my > comcast email account (OE), my work IMAP account (Outlook), Yahoo > Messenger, and the Spampal blocklists. So a bunch of different ports > are being used, but none can connect. No. A bunch of different *names* are getting used. Unless you 'hardwire' as some people call it, the IP address for such as your comcast email account in OE, if there isn't nameservice, nothing is going to happen. It doesn't have anything to do with the different ports, if the application isn't directed to the correct IP address, it will never find the appropriate server. > Any attempt to access a web > page before ipconfig/renew gets a "cannot connect" error message, the > contents of which are probably important to you if it's a DNS error > message, but I can't remember the exact language at the moment. But we typically call for our webpages by their names, not the IP. > Oh, and have I mentioned that sometimes I need to run /renew several > times before it works? I'm just saying that what you have told so far can't distinguish nameservice problems from connectivity problems. At least to me. I know the feeling because I have had nameservice problems. No nameservice means you can't do much unless you know something's IP, and even then it is not unusual for webservers to 'decline' to give you anything by the IP alone. I had to try about 8 different whatismyip places before I found one which would answer when called by its IP address. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 20:04:13 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 7 20:05:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: Here's a bunch of info I gathered: First attempt to get on the web: Cannot find server or DNS Error Internet Explorer All following messages are from event viewer: Your computer was not able to renew its address from the network (from the DHCP Server) for the Network Card with network address 000C769041BF. The following error occured: The semaphore timeout period has expired. . Your computer will continue to try and obtain an address on its own from the network address (DHCP) server. The server {0002DF01-0000-0000-C000-000000000046} did not register with DCOM within the required timeout. Your computer has lost the lease to its IP address 192.168.100.10 on the Network Card with network address 000C769041BF. The IP address lease 68.54.170.46 for the Network Card with network address 000C769041BF has been denied by the DHCP server 0.0.0.0 (The DHCP Server sent a DHCPNACK message). Unable to contact a DHCP server. The Automatic Private IP Address 169.254.153.20 will be assigned to dial-in clients. Clients may be unable to access resources on the network. The IP address lease 192.168.100.10 for the Network Card with network address 000C769041BF has been denied by the DHCP server 68.87.73.15 (The DHCP Server sent a DHCPNACK message). The IP address lease 68.54.170.46 for the Network Card with network address 000C769041BF has been denied by the DHCP server 0.0.0.0 (The DHCP Server sent a DHCPNACK message). The server could not bind to the transport \Device\NetbiosSmb because another computer on the network has the same name. The server could not start. The server could not bind to the transport \Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{3C809F74-8419-4603-9262-CACE1DB6EBB8}. ****While mucking about with ipconfig I ran ipconfig /flushdns and ipconfig /registerdns, but did not run ipconfig /renew. Several minutes later, I attempted to sign in to Yahoo Messenger and instantly got in, and was also able to access the internet. What did those two commands do, and which one cleared up the problem? I'm going to reboot and see what happens now. From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 20:09:15 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 7 20:10:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: >> > What happens when [during the trouble without/before using your > ipconfig renew] you > > - try to ping your DHCP derived DNS by IP number > - try to ping [or resolve] your DHCP derived DNS by its name > - try to ping your gateway IP by its IP number > - try to ping [or resolve] your gateway IP by its name > Ping failed on all of those before I ran /flushdns and /registerdns. From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 20:22:39 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 7 20:25:11 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: >> > > Ping failed on all of those before I ran /flushdns and /registerdns. Rebooted, no joy, and /registerdns is what got me back online, /flushdns did not. Also found this new error message in event viewer: Your computer was not able to renew its address from the network (from the DHCP Server) for the Network Card with network address 000C769041BF. The following error occured: The semaphore timeout period has expired. . Your computer will continue to try and obtain an address on its own from the network address (DHCP) server. From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 20:25:09 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 7 20:30:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: Found a new error in event viewer: The system failed to register network adapter with settings: Adapter Name : {3C809F74-8419-4603-9262-CACE1DB6EBB8} Host Name : cc1074876 Adapter-specific Domain Suffix : hsd1.md.comcast.net. DNS server list : 68.87.73.242, 68.87.71.226 Sent update to server : None IP Address(es) : 68.54.170.46 The cause of this DNS registration failure was because of DNS server failure. This may be due to a zone transfer that has locked the DNS server for the applicable zone that your computer needs to register itself with. From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 7 20:26:45 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 7 20:30:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: Another weird error message, this one looks like a real problem to me: The system failed to register pointer (PTR) resource records (RRs) for network adapter with settings: Adapter Name : {3C809F74-8419-4603-9262-CACE1DB6EBB8} Host Name : cc1074876 Adapter-specific Domain Suffix : hsd1.md.comcast.net. DNS server list : 68.87.73.242, 68.87.71.226 Sent update to server : 68.87.96.3 IP Address : 68.54.170.46 The reason that the system could not register these RRs was because (a) either the DNS server does not support the DNS dynamic update protocol, or (b) the authoritative zone where these records are to be registered does not allow dynamic updates. To register DNS pointer (PTR) resource records using the specific DNS domain name and IP addresses for this adapter, contact your DNS server or network systems administrator. From SC.10.myspamgobbler at spamcowboy.net Mon Nov 7 20:00:30 2005 From: SC.10.myspamgobbler at spamcowboy.net (Brian) Date: Mon Nov 7 23:05:11 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: A quick question. Have you tried with the firewall disabled? -- Brian SC.10.myspamgobbler@spamcowboy.net From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Nov 8 07:36:07 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Nov 8 07:40:05 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: Brian wrote: > A quick question. Have you tried with the firewall disabled? Yes. No joy. Found something weird last night (among all of the other strange error messages I listed in other posts). I uninstalled my ethernet adapter, rebooted, Windows found it and reinstalled it, still couldn't connect. When I went to check what driver it was using, the answer was none, and none was required! Is that normal? The damn troubleshooter also said it was funtioning properly :-( From borgholio at storymind.com Tue Nov 8 09:37:32 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Tue Nov 8 12:40:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Brian wrote: > >>A quick question. Have you tried with the firewall disabled? > > > Yes. No joy. Found something weird last night (among all of the other > strange error messages I listed in other posts). I uninstalled my ethernet > adapter, rebooted, Windows found it and reinstalled it, still couldn't > connect. When I went to check what driver it was using, the answer was none, > and none was required! Is that normal? The damn troubleshooter also said it > was funtioning properly :-( > > I think EVERYTHING needs a driver. That could be worth looking into. From MikeE at ster.invalid Tue Nov 8 10:03:03 2005 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Tue Nov 8 13:05:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Mike Easter wrote: >>> >> What happens when [during the trouble without/before using your >> ipconfig renew] you >> >> - try to ping your DHCP derived DNS by IP number >> - try to ping [or resolve] your DHCP derived DNS by its name >> - try to ping your gateway IP by its IP number >> - try to ping [or resolve] your gateway IP by its name >> > > Ping failed on all of those before I ran /flushdns and /registerdns. I would say that it isn't simply a matter of not having nameservice, it is a matter of connectivity, of not being connected to the network. I have never seen any of those errors you posted in the post before, so I can't contribute anything about them. Well, I could say /something/ about some of them, but the something I would say would be that there's evidence of the connectivity problem, of not being networked to the WAN, of not be able to get 'out'. It isn't a matter of being connected with no nameservice. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Nov 8 13:08:23 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Nov 8 13:10:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: Borgholio wrote: > indigo wrote: > > Brian wrote: > > > >>A quick question. Have you tried with the firewall disabled? > > > > > > Yes. No joy. Found something weird last night (among all of the > > other strange error messages I listed in other posts). I > > uninstalled my ethernet adapter, rebooted, Windows found it and > > reinstalled it, still couldn't connect. When I went to check what > > driver it was using, the answer was none, and none was required! Is > > that normal? The damn troubleshooter also said it was funtioning > > properly :-( > > > > > > I think EVERYTHING needs a driver. That could be worth looking into. Any suggestion on HOW to look into it since winbloze is claiming nothing is wrong? From borgholio at storymind.com Tue Nov 8 10:10:37 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Tue Nov 8 13:15:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Borgholio wrote: > >>indigo wrote: >> >>>Brian wrote: >>> >>> >>>>A quick question. Have you tried with the firewall disabled? >>> >>> >>>Yes. No joy. Found something weird last night (among all of the >>>other strange error messages I listed in other posts). I >>>uninstalled my ethernet adapter, rebooted, Windows found it and >>>reinstalled it, still couldn't connect. When I went to check what >>>driver it was using, the answer was none, and none was required! Is >>>that normal? The damn troubleshooter also said it was funtioning >>>properly :-( >>> >>> >> >>I think EVERYTHING needs a driver. That could be worth looking into. > > > Any suggestion on HOW to look into it since winbloze is claiming nothing is > wrong? > > You could try manually loading the driver from the original install discs...if you have them. If not, you got another network adapter you could try? From MikeE at ster.invalid Tue Nov 8 10:14:47 2005 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Tue Nov 8 13:15:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: This post is an example of why I believe that it is better to thread messages by subject/date rather than by reference line. That is, it is better for /me/ - for my reading, because I like to read news messages in chronological order rather than in the order of a reference line tree's branches. I posted this message after I posted message news:dkqp8j$d9n$1@news.spamcop.net - but for some threaders it will appear and be read before that message. indigo wrote: > First attempt to get on the web: > Cannot find server or DNS Error > Internet Explorer can't find the server because it isn't connected to the internet or WAN. > Your computer has lost the lease to its IP address 192.168.100.10 on > the Network Card with network address 000C769041BF. But that address is a local address, not its 'real' IP. > The IP address lease 68.54.170.46 for the Network Card with network > address 000C769041BF has been denied by the DHCP server 0.0.0.0 (The > DHCP Server sent a DHCPNACK message). That's its real IP, but that's not the proper address for its DHCP server. > Unable to contact a DHCP server. Because it isn't connected/ WAN networked > The IP address lease 192.168.100.10 for the Network Card with network > address 000C769041BF has been denied by the DHCP server 68.87.73.15 > (The DHCP Server sent a DHCPNACK message). That's the proper address for the dhcp, but not the proper assigned/leased IP. > The IP address lease 68.54.170.46 for the Network Card with network > address 000C769041BF has been denied by the DHCP server 0.0.0.0 (The > DHCP Server sent a DHCPNACK message). Wrong address for the dhcp server. > The server could not bind to the transport \Device\NetbiosSmb because > another computer on the network has the same name. The server could > not start. I don't know what server that might be. > ****While mucking about with ipconfig I ran ipconfig /flushdns and > ipconfig /registerdns, but did not run ipconfig /renew. Several > minutes later, I attempted to sign in to Yahoo Messenger and > instantly got in, and was also able to access the internet. What did > those two commands do, and which one cleared up the problem? > > I'm going to reboot and see what happens now. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From MikeE at ster.invalid Tue Nov 8 10:22:58 2005 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Tue Nov 8 13:25:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: >When I went to check what driver it was > using, the answer was none, and none was required! Is that normal? I have seen that before for working devices. I don't know any more than that. Presumably the support/driverishness for the device would be built into the OS and thus there wouldn't be a little file/directory tree to show you with the driver file details button. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Nov 8 13:26:32 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Nov 8 13:30:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! References: Message-ID: Borgholio wrote: > > You could try manually loading the driver from the original install > discs...if you have them. If not, you got another network adapter > you could try? Yeah, I have both the original disk that came with the MoBo and the 2000 install disk. The problem is finding the right place on the CD rom (CAB file or driver file) because winbloze won't automatically find it for me and I have no idea what the correct driver filename is. It's an *.inf file I need, or a *.drv? From borgholio at storymind.com Tue Nov 8 10:29:34 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Tue Nov 8 13:30:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Help Goddammmmitt! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Borgholio wrote: > >>You could try manually loading the driver from the original install >>discs...if you have them. If not, you got another network adapter >>you could try? > > > Yeah, I have both the original disk that came with the MoBo and the 2000 > install disk. The problem is finding the right place on the CD rom (CAB file > or driver file) because winbloze won't automatically find it for me and I > have no idea what the correct driver filename is. It's an *.inf file I need, > or a *.drv? > > Typically it's a *.inf file. From Ilgaz at spamcop.net Fri Nov 11 08:47:50 2005 From: Ilgaz at spamcop.net (Ilgaz Ocal) Date: Fri Nov 11 01:50:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Seen in a spam References: Message-ID: On 2005-11-01 21:58:29 +0200, "Pop" said: > "did this campaign reach you in error? > pls click the remove link at our website, and enter your > id there" > > Yeah, I know, don't read 'em, but it was right there in front of me! > What an idiot! Wonder how many people actually still click? > > Pop I don't suggest to anyone but for adventure and being on mac, I tried some of phishing mails I got. You know,those fake links. What amazed me is, they WORK and they are overhelmed by innocent customers entering data, giving "Server too busy" errors. Imagine, banks are sending personal letters to people alerting about this issue and phishing sites go down because of popularity! :) Now just imagine how many will fill that form :) Ilgaz From post.please.this.email.is.not.valid at example.com Fri Nov 11 10:27:02 2005 From: post.please.this.email.is.not.valid at example.com (DougW) Date: Fri Nov 11 11:30:05 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Seen in a spam References: Message-ID: Ilgaz Ocal did pass the time by typing: > You know,those fake links. > > What amazed me is, they WORK and they are overhelmed by innocent > customers entering data, giving "Server too busy" errors. :) who says it's "innocent customers" overwhelming the spammers forms. :) -- DougW From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Fri Nov 11 15:23:06 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Pop) Date: Fri Nov 11 15:25:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Mailinator? Message-ID: I wasn't sure just where to post this, so me, myself and I held an election and me and I both voted for geeks, so ... Anyone heard of www.mailinator.com? Here's a guy who's been thinking outside the box, IMO. Not that I know whether that's -good- or it's -bad-, but definitely outside the box! Either that or I can't see outside my own box! Mostly I was just wondering how it works, and if it was as simple to set up as I suspect. Thought maybe some webbers here might know. It seems to be about a year and a half old, and Google seems to have nothing bad to say about it, not that I looked hard. I came across it accidentally looking for M.A.P.S., forgetting they were taken over. Specifically, I can't see how mailinator would be doing anything "bad", but ... being paranoid today ... well ... . The make your own email address and THEN go see if there's mail to it without ever having signed up for it's interesting. But the most interesting thing I found is his current map of where spam's coming from. It's probably no big feat, but based on my spam experience lately, it's pretty accurate. I enjoyed the current spam source map. Kind of wonder if Google knows he's using it that way, but ... that's his problem, not mine . Anyway, thought I'd either give him some traffic or pick up some useful knowledge about it. I haven't tried it but from the looks of his forum and Google Groups, it does work, and I didn't see any downsides. Pop -- --- twaynesdomain.com: Best little website in the North Country! From pete+usenet at heypete.com Fri Nov 11 13:30:00 2005 From: pete+usenet at heypete.com (Pete Stephenson) Date: Fri Nov 11 16:30:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Mailinator? References: Message-ID: In article , "Pop" wrote: > I wasn't sure just where to post this, so me, myself and I held > an election and me and I both voted for geeks, so ... Sounds like a plan. > Anyone heard of www.mailinator.com? Here's a guy who's been > thinking outside the box, IMO. Not that I know whether > that's -good- or it's -bad-, but definitely outside the box! > Either that or I can't see outside my own box! Yup, it's an interesting concept. > Mostly I was just wondering how it works, and if it was as simple > to set up as I suspect. Thought maybe some webbers here might > know. It seems to be about a year and a half old, and Google > seems to have nothing bad to say about it, not that I looked > hard. I came across it accidentally looking for M.A.P.S., > forgetting they were taken over. Specifically, I can't see > how mailinator would be doing anything "bad", but ... being > paranoid today ... well ... . > The make your own email address and THEN go see if there's > mail to it without ever having signed up for it's interesting. > But the most interesting thing I found is his current map of > where spam's coming from. It's probably no big feat, but based > on my spam experience lately, it's pretty accurate. I enjoyed > the current spam source map. Kind of wonder if Google knows he's > using it that way, but ... that's his problem, not mine . Yes, it's pretty easy to setup. Indeed, there's *no* setup at all. Similarly, there's no privacy, so don't have personal email sent there. When asked for an email address, I generally put in me@privacy.net. If that doesn't work, or they need a confirmation address, then I just make up something @mailinator.com. Take, for example, donut@mailinator.com. Message gets sent to that address, I go to the website, enter "donut" into the proper field, then can read any messages sent to it. No need to pre-register or anything. It's a remarkably useful site. :) > Anyway, thought I'd either give him some traffic or pick up some > useful knowledge about it. I haven't tried it but from the looks > of his forum and Google Groups, it does work, and I didn't see > any downsides. Indeed. All I can see as a downside is the lack of privacy, but then again, you shouldn't be using that service for anything requiring privacy. -- Pete Stephenson HeyPete.com From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Fri Nov 11 19:42:12 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Pop) Date: Fri Nov 11 19:45:17 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Mailinator? References: Message-ID: "Pete Stephenson" wrote in message news:pete+usenet-A83810.13300011112005@news.cesmail.net... : In article , : "Pop" wrote: : : > I wasn't sure just where to post this, so me, myself and I held : > an election and me and I both voted for geeks, so ... : : Sounds like a plan. : : > Anyone heard of www.mailinator.com? Here's a guy who's been : > thinking outside the box, IMO. Not that I know whether : > that's -good- or it's -bad-, but definitely outside the box! : > Either that or I can't see outside my own box! : : Yup, it's an interesting concept. : : > Mostly I was just wondering how it works, and if it was as simple : > to set up as I suspect. Thought maybe some webbers here might ...> But the most interesting thing I found is his current map of : > where spam's coming from. It's probably no big feat, but based : > on my spam experience lately, it's pretty accurate. I enjoyed : > the current spam source map. Kind of wonder if Google knows he's : > using it that way, but ... that's his problem, not mine . : : Yes, it's pretty easy to setup. Indeed, there's *no* setup at all. : Similarly, there's no privacy, so don't have personal email sent there. : : When asked for an email address, I generally put in me@privacy.net. If : that doesn't work, or they need a confirmation address, then I just make : up something @mailinator.com. Take, for example, donut@mailinator.com. : Message gets sent to that address, I go to the website, enter "donut" : into the proper field, then can read any messages sent to it. : : No need to pre-register or anything. : : It's a remarkably useful site. :) : : > Anyway, thought I'd either give him some traffic or pick up some : > useful knowledge about it. I haven't tried it but from the looks : > of his forum and Google Groups, it does work, and I didn't see : > any downsides. : : Indeed. All I can see as a downside is the lack of privacy, but then : again, you shouldn't be using that service for anything requiring : privacy. : : -- : Pete Stephenson : HeyPete.com Yeah, that's pretty much how I see it, too. Long's he doesn't hit the really big-time it's not even a load on the servers since everything has such a short lifespan there. The forum he's running there gave it a lot of credibility, I think. I'm still curious -why- he's doing it though; there has to be a reason that's a benefit to the owners. I thought about scraping addresses from incoming emails, but it's over a year old and squeaky clean, near's I can tell. I'll have to keep it in mind. Maybe there ARE 3 good people left in the world! ;-) Best! Pop From nobody at nowhere.invalid Sat Nov 12 11:39:05 2005 From: nobody at nowhere.invalid (Steven Maesslein) Date: Sat Nov 12 05:40:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Mailinator? References: Message-ID: On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 15:23:06 -0500, Pop coughed into spamcop.geeks and left this in : > I wasn't sure just where to post this, so me, myself and I held > an election and me and I both voted for geeks, so ... Didn't Joan have anything to add? (let's see who catches that reference) -- Steve Q: Why is Christmas just like a day at the office? A: You do all of the work and the fat guy in the suit gets all the credit. From pete+usenet at heypete.com Sat Nov 12 12:59:42 2005 From: pete+usenet at heypete.com (Pete Stephenson) Date: Sat Nov 12 16:00:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Mailinator? References: Message-ID: In article , "Pop" wrote: > I'm still curious -why- he's doing it though; there has to be > a reason that's a benefit to the owners. I thought about > scraping addresses from incoming emails, but it's over a year old > and squeaky clean, near's I can tell. I'll have to keep it in > mind. Maybe there ARE 3 good people left in the world! ;-) Well, there *are* the Google ads on the top. I would imagine that he makes some money (maybe not enough, but some) by running those ads. There's also some of the referral stuff on the right side to his web hosting company and so on. Mailinator and Sneakemail.com are some of the more useful sites I've found over the years. -- Pete Stephenson HeyPete.com From dfm2a3l0t2 at spymac.com Sat Nov 12 18:27:54 2005 From: dfm2a3l0t2 at spymac.com (D.F. Manno) Date: Sat Nov 12 18:30:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Mailinator? References: Message-ID: In article , Pete Stephenson wrote: > When asked for an email address, I generally put in me@privacy.net. If > that doesn't work, or they need a confirmation address, then I just make > up something @mailinator.com. Take, for example, donut@mailinator.com. > Message gets sent to that address, I go to the website, enter "donut" > into the proper field, then can read any messages sent to it. > > No need to pre-register or anything. > > It's a remarkably useful site. :) It would be if it worked. I tried using it for the first time this week. I never got the confirmation email that was to be sent. I even sent a test email to the address I made up. That never arrived, either. -- D.F. Manno | dfm2a3l0t2@spymac.com I'm a thief in the house of love And I can't be trusted. -Bruce Springsteen From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Sun Nov 13 07:33:28 2005 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Sun Nov 13 08:35:10 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Mailinator? References: Message-ID: In article , "D.F. Manno" writes: >> It's a remarkably useful site. :) > > It would be if it worked. I tried using it for the first time this week. I never > got the confirmation email that was to be sent. I even sent a test email to the > address I made up. That never arrived, either. What subject did you use ? >From http://www.mailinator.com/mailinator/map.html > Do NOT send an email with a subject of test - it will likely bounce! > See the forums for an explanation of why. But that page does not really work for me. Looking at the source of the page, they seem to expect that JavaScript is enabled. Why they think someone concerned about spam would enable JavaScript I cannot understand. From dfm2a3l0t2 at spymac.com Sun Nov 13 16:04:26 2005 From: dfm2a3l0t2 at spymac.com (D.F. Manno) Date: Sun Nov 13 16:05:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Mailinator? References: Message-ID: In article , Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) wrote: > "D.F. Manno" writes: > > > It would be if it worked. I tried using it for the first time > > this week. I never got the confirmation email that was to be > > sent. I even sent a test email to the address I made up. That > > never arrived, either. > > What subject did you use ? > From http://www.mailinator.com/mailinator/map.html > > > Do NOT send an email with a subject of test - it will likely bounce! > > See the forums for an explanation of why. The subject wasn't "test." It was just the first three words from the random text I grabbed for the message (IIRC, "the extra assistance"). The email didn't bounce, either. It just vanished. -- D.F. Manno | dfm2a3l0t2@spymac.com I'm a thief in the house of love And I can't be trusted. -Bruce Springsteen From me at privacy.net Mon Nov 14 23:03:07 2005 From: me at privacy.net (Tom Cumming) Date: Mon Nov 14 18:05:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Strange Google error Message-ID: I was doing a search on Google today, and instead of getting the results, I got to a page with this message: "We're sorry... ... but we can't process your request right now. A computer virus or spyware application is sending us automated requests, and it appears that your computer or network has been infected. We'll restore your access as quickly as possible, so try again soon. In the meantime, you might want to run a virus checker or spyware remover to make sure that your computer is free of viruses and other spurious software. We apologize for the inconvenience, and hope we'll see you again on Google." It then gave a box where you have to type in the characters in a picture, and then once I did that, it allowed me to my search results. I was using a regularly-updated Linux box, so I would think the likelihood I am infected with anything is pretty remote, and the only other computer on the network was turned off at the time. Should I be worried? Many thanks. From post.please.this.email.is.not.valid at example.com Mon Nov 14 17:10:10 2005 From: post.please.this.email.is.not.valid at example.com (DougW) Date: Mon Nov 14 18:15:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Strange Google error References: Message-ID: Tom Cumming did pass the time by typing: > I was doing a search on Google today, and instead of getting the > results, I got to a page with this message: > > "We're sorry... > ... but we can't process your request right now. A computer virus > or spyware application is sending us automated requests, and it > appears that your computer or network has been infected. > We'll restore your access as quickly as possible, so try again > soon. In the meantime, you might want to run a virus checker or > spyware remover to make sure that your computer is free of viruses > and other spurious software. > We apologize for the inconvenience, and hope we'll see you again > on Google." > > It then gave a box where you have to type in the characters in a > picture, and then once I did that, it allowed me to my search results. > > I was using a regularly-updated Linux box, so I would think the > likelihood I am infected with anything is pretty remote, and the > only other computer on the network was turned off at the time. > > Should I be worried? I'd check what services you have running and check the logs just in case. Even here my network is behind a hardware firewall. Could be you have an open proxy. Actually if you throw too many requests at google, or happen to use a proxy that does, that error can pop up. But it has to be a lot of queries. -- DougW From none at domain.invalid Mon Nov 14 17:23:35 2005 From: none at domain.invalid (Anonymous) Date: Mon Nov 14 20:30:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Strange Google error References: Message-ID: "Tom Cumming" wrote in message news:dlb53c$3av$1@news.spamcop.net... >I was doing a search on Google today, and instead of getting the results, >I got to a page with this message: > > "We're sorry... > ... but we can't process your request right now. A computer virus or > spyware application is sending us automated requests, and it appears > that your computer or network has been infected. > We'll restore your access as quickly as possible, so try again soon. In > the meantime, you might want to run a virus checker or spyware remover > to make sure that your computer is free of viruses and other spurious > software. > We apologize for the inconvenience, and hope we'll see you again on > Google." > > It then gave a box where you have to type in the characters in a > picture, and then once I did that, it allowed me to my search results. > > I was using a regularly-updated Linux box, so I would think the > likelihood I am infected with anything is pretty remote, and the only > other computer on the network was turned off at the time. > > Should I be worried? Yeah, I get that all the time... but then, I use Google a LOT, especially Google Groups... it takes a lot of searching to exhaustively dig out information on spammers. If you're not hitting Google all that often, then you should check your computer for / with the following: Adware : Lavasoft Ad-Aware Spyware : Spybot Search & Destroy, A-Squared Viruses : AVG antivirus or the AV program of your choice (as long as it isn't Norton, Symantec or McAfee... they've gone downhill in their accuracy and the programs tend to be bloat-ware). Rootkits : SysInternals Rootkit Revealer Another good way of catching nefarious programs making connections is to let your computer sit idle for a while without any programs making internet connections. Then open a command prompt and run 'netstat -abon' (without the quotes). In Task Manager, go to the Processes tab, then click View >> Select Columns. Select the following columns: PID, CPU Usage, Memory Usage, USER Objects, Handle Count, Thread Count Resize each column and resize Task Manager so that you can see all the data in Task Manager, and cross-correlate the PID from the netstat with the programs running in Task Manager. If you see any programs that are making external connections that aren't supposed to, then you can Google for that file name to see if it's malicious. If you see any programs taking an inordinate amount of CPU time, memory, memory handles, or threads, Google on those file names to see if they're malicious. This assumes, of course, that you're running WinXP. From not at home.today Tue Nov 15 01:27:51 2005 From: not at home.today (Ant) Date: Mon Nov 14 20:30:11 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Strange Google error References: Message-ID: "DougW" wrote: > Tom Cumming did pass the time by typing: >> I was doing a search on Google today, and instead of getting the >> results, I got to a page with this message: >> >> "We're sorry... >> ... but we can't process your request right now. A computer virus >> or spyware application is sending us automated requests, and it >> appears that your computer or network has been infected. [snip] > I'd check what services you have running and check the logs > just in case. Even here my network is behind a hardware firewall. > Could be you have an open proxy. > > Actually if you throw too many requests at google, or happen to use > a proxy that does, that error can pop up. But it has to be a lot of > queries. I had a similar problem last year when visiting dnsstuff.com, and got this page: |DNSStuff | |WARNING: You are using a web proxy ([redacted]) that appears to be |an open proxy, and is currently being abused by malware. You should |contact whoever is in charge of your web proxy (if you aren't sure, |contact your Internet provider) for assistance. You should let them |know that the web proxy at [redacted] is broken (an 'open web proxy' |that is being abused), and that the web proxy needs to be fixed. They |can contact us (using our info@ address at the domain in the URL you |are at) for further details. Searching your web proxy logs for |'netgeo.ch' will definitely find the rogue hits (but could possibly |find some legitimate hits). | |Sorry for the inconvenience, but we are under a DDoS attack, and your |Internet provider is partially responsible. My ISP uses several invisible (to me) caching proxies for http requests, so perhaps one of them was compromised in some way (I've no idea what the significance of 'netgeo.ch' was). There was certainly no malware on my sytem. If the OP visits http://www.dnsstuff.com it will show his IP address, and from that he can determine if his ISP is using a web cache. If it is, then the problem should be reported to his ISP. From nobody at nowhere.invalid Tue Nov 15 12:56:13 2005 From: nobody at nowhere.invalid (Steven Maesslein) Date: Tue Nov 15 07:00:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Strange Google error References: Message-ID: On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 23:03:07 +0000, Tom Cumming coughed into spamcop.geeks and left this in : > I was using a regularly-updated Linux box, so I would think the > likelihood I am infected with anything is pretty remote, and the > only other computer on the network was turned off at the time. You're probably on a dynamic IP address, and the last (or a recent) box to use it was an infected Windows machine belonging to another subscriber to the same ISP as you. -- Steve Exposing M$ sExchange directly to the Internet is a lot like painting a bulls-eye on your backside and bending over, naked, in a Greenwich Village steam room (except M$ is not nearly as safe). -- Morely 'spam is theft' Dotes in NANAE, 08-JUL-2003. From me at privacy.net Tue Nov 15 23:52:47 2005 From: me at privacy.net (Tom Cumming) Date: Tue Nov 15 18:55:21 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Strange Google error In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Steven Maesslein wrote: > You're probably on a dynamic IP address, and the last (or a recent) box > to use it was an infected Windows machine belonging to another > subscriber to the same ISP as you. It is a dynamic IP, but our router sits connected almost 24/7, so I'm not sure how often it actually changes. From me at privacy.net Tue Nov 15 23:58:53 2005 From: me at privacy.net (Tom Cumming) Date: Tue Nov 15 19:00:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Strange Google error In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ant wrote: > My ISP uses several invisible (to me) caching proxies for http > requests, so perhaps one of them was compromised in some way (I've no > idea what the significance of 'netgeo.ch' was). There was certainly no > malware on my sytem. I know NTL use webcaches so it may well be that. Not sure why that did not occur to me before.. Thanks. From nobody at nowhere.invalid Wed Nov 16 13:58:40 2005 From: nobody at nowhere.invalid (Steven Maesslein) Date: Wed Nov 16 08:00:24 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Possible new form of infection Message-ID: I have several users whose computers are exhibiting odd behaviour. It would appear that *something* slurped up login information from the registry and is logging into the POP3 server (which I control). What's weird is that one of them filled in the wrong POP3 login at one point and corrected it later, but the *something* is still attempting to log in with the incorrect login. I googled around for pointers but came up with nothing. Does anyone around here know of this "infection" (which is what I'm guessing it is) and, better still, how the hell I can get rid of it? The antivirus software on both sites (apparently up to date) says there are no infections - and FWIW this has been going on since before virus writers exploited the Sony rootkit to conceal their stuff. -- Steve The First Commandment for Technicians: Beware the lightening that lurketh in the undischarged capacitor, lest it cause thee to bounce upon thy buttocks in a most untechnician-like manner. From anthony.edwards at uk.easynet.net Wed Nov 16 14:46:40 2005 From: anthony.edwards at uk.easynet.net (Anthony Edwards) Date: Wed Nov 16 09:50:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Possible new form of infection References: Message-ID: On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 13:58:40 +0100, Steven Maesslein wrote: > I have several users whose computers are exhibiting odd behaviour. > > It would appear that *something* slurped up login information from the > registry and is logging into the POP3 server (which I control). Have you questioned the users concerning the possibility of an email client such as Eudora being legitimately configured to repeatedly POP at a pre-determined interval? > What's weird is that one of them filled in the wrong POP3 login at one > point and corrected it later, but the *something* is still attempting to > log in with the incorrect login. >From the user's actual IP address, or a different IP address on yours or another network? If the former, perhaps the user has two email client software packages installed (perhaps having recently switched from one to the other), both of which are POP'ing? One with the correct login details, and one without? > I googled around for pointers but came up with nothing. Does anyone > around here know of this "infection" (which is what I'm guessing it is) > and, better still, how the hell I can get rid of it? This sounds much more likely to be due to user error than infection or compromise. I can foresee a time (which may not be far away) when malware will exist (if it doesn't already) which obtains SMTP AUTH information from the Windows registry and then misuses it to relay outbound UBE via an SMTP AUTH enabled smarthost, however. > The antivirus software on both sites (apparently up to date) says > there are no infections - and FWIW this has been going on since before > virus writers exploited the Sony rootkit to conceal their stuff. User error is I think the most likely possible explanation, as above. -- Anthony Edwards * anthony.edwards@uk.easynet.net Abuse Team Manager * Tel: 0800 053 0588 Easynet Ltd * DDI: 0161 227 0707 http://www.uk.easynet.net * Fax: 0845 333 4503 From nobody at nowhere.invalid Wed Nov 16 16:21:50 2005 From: nobody at nowhere.invalid (Steven Maesslein) Date: Wed Nov 16 10:25:06 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Possible new form of infection References: Message-ID: On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 14:46:40 +0000 (UTC), Anthony Edwards coughed into spamcop.geeks and left this in : > From the user's actual IP address, or a different IP address on yours > or another network? If the former, perhaps the user has two email > client software packages installed (perhaps having recently switched > from one to the other), both of which are POP'ing? One with the > correct login details, and one without? It turns out that one site was McAfee's anti-spam software polling the POP3 server with the wrong login. This has been solved (touch wood...) The other site, however, is more intriguing. I'm driving there Saturday to have a look-see and I suspect that it'll be something similar, especially as the user won't touch IE and OE with a barge pole and prefers to use Thunderbird and Firefox instead. -- Steve "Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Wed Nov 16 16:59:11 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Wed Nov 16 17:00:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? Message-ID: Sheesh, look where I"m asking... My usual computer guy has now got an exclusive contract with another company and is only available nights and weekends. We need (I think) a bigger hard drive installed in our Dell server, and he's quoting me $600 for the drive (a 73.5GB Hard Drive, 10000rpm, Ultra320 SCSI would be around $320.00, he says), and the rest for 3 hrs labor to install and migrate the data. I'm thinking that's a bit steep. The Dell original configuration lists 2 36 gig drives, right now, the server C drive is partitioned for 4 gig , the storage drive we use has a 29 gig capacity. I"m thinking that we either have two drives and are not using one , or that it came with 2 drives and one was removed before he sold it to us, (second hand). He says we're using BOTH drives and the storage drive is full. WHy is C only partitioned to 4 gig if it's a 36 gig drive? I'd open the box and look myself but everyone would scream if I shut the server off right now....I think something's fishy, though. From borgholio at storymind.com Wed Nov 16 14:05:18 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Wed Nov 16 17:10:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > Sheesh, look where I"m asking... My usual computer guy has now got an exclusive > contract with another company and is only available nights and weekends. We need (I > think) a bigger hard drive installed in our Dell server, and he's quoting me $600 for > the drive (a 73.5GB Hard Drive, 10000rpm, Ultra320 SCSI would be around $320.00, he > says), and the rest for 3 hrs labor to install and migrate the data. I'm thinking > that's a bit steep. > > The Dell original configuration lists 2 36 gig drives, right now, the server C drive > is partitioned for 4 gig , the storage drive we use has a 29 gig capacity. I"m > thinking that we either have two drives and are not using one , or that it came with > 2 drives and one was removed before he sold it to us, (second hand). He says we're > using BOTH drives and the storage drive is full. WHy is C only partitioned to 4 gig > if it's a 36 gig drive? > > I'd open the box and look myself but everyone would scream if I shut the server off > right now....I think something's fishy, though. > > > Older operating systems (such as Windows NT) only partioned the first 4 gig of a hard drive when the OS was installed. This was because even though NT used the NTFS file format, it would format the drive with FAT 16 first (which had a 4-gig limit) then convert it to NTFS. You would need to format the rest of the drive from within Windows if you wanted it to go straight to NTFS (and thus access the rest of the drive). I suggest you check your disk management and see if there's any "unpartioned" or "unused" space on your drive. From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Nov 16 17:07:49 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Wed Nov 16 17:10:09 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: Borgholio wrote: I suggest you check your disk management and see if there's > any "unpartioned" or "unused" space on your drive. Dammit! Beat me to the punch by 10 seconds ;-) yeah, what borg sed. Make sure you actually have two physical hard drives, if you do, that missing 32 megs should show up on C: as unformatted. From borgholio at storymind.com Wed Nov 16 14:32:30 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Wed Nov 16 17:35:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Borgholio wrote: > I suggest you check your disk management and see if there's > >>any "unpartioned" or "unused" space on your drive. > > > Dammit! Beat me to the punch by 10 seconds ;-) yeah, what borg sed. Make > sure you actually have two physical hard drives, if you do, that missing 32 > megs should show up on C: as unformatted. > > Yet more proof that I am still young and spry. :-P From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Nov 16 17:40:33 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Wed Nov 16 17:45:38 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: Borgholio wrote: > indigo wrote: > > Borgholio wrote: > > I suggest you check your disk management and see if there's > > > >>any "unpartioned" or "unused" space on your drive. > > > > > > Dammit! Beat me to the punch by 10 seconds ;-) yeah, what borg sed. > > Make sure you actually have two physical hard drives, if you do, > > that missing 32 megs should show up on C: as unformatted. > > > > > > Yet more proof that I am still young and spry. :-P And weren't doing any real work when Heidi posted :-P From borgholio at storymind.com Wed Nov 16 14:49:06 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Wed Nov 16 17:50:16 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Borgholio wrote: > >>indigo wrote: >> >>>Borgholio wrote: >>>I suggest you check your disk management and see if there's >>> >>> >>>>any "unpartioned" or "unused" space on your drive. >>> >>> >>>Dammit! Beat me to the punch by 10 seconds ;-) yeah, what borg sed. >>>Make sure you actually have two physical hard drives, if you do, >>>that missing 32 megs should show up on C: as unformatted. >>> >>> >> >>Yet more proof that I am still young and spry. :-P > > > And weren't doing any real work when Heidi posted :-P > > Work? What's that? From gospamming at yourdomain.invalid Thu Nov 17 09:24:21 2005 From: gospamming at yourdomain.invalid (D.Diaz) Date: Thu Nov 17 04:25:18 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: "Spamvireslayer" wrote in news:dlga3l$u47$1@news.spamcop.net: > The Dell original configuration lists 2 36 gig drives, right now, the > server C drive is partitioned for 4 gig , the storage drive we use has > a 29 gig capacity. I"m thinking that we either have two drives and > are not using one , or that it came with 2 drives and one was removed > before he sold it to us, (second hand). He says we're using BOTH > drives and the storage drive is full. WHy is C only partitioned to 4 > gig if it's a 36 gig drive? > > I'd open the box and look myself but everyone would scream if I shut > the server off right now....I think something's fishy, though. > The most probable configuration for the situation you're describing is: two 36 gig drives in RAID 1 (mirrored) setup, so you can only see an effective capacity of 36 gigs. If you want to increase your storage maintaining this configuration, you need to buy another pair of identical drives (i.e. 2 x 73.5GB) and set them up in RAID 1 too. If your server is worth its name (do you see "hot swap" anywhere in your server documentation?), the disks can be inserted, configured and put in service without bringing the system down. HTH -- Daniel Diaz SpamCop User From info at dHosted.com Thu Nov 17 14:14:09 2005 From: info at dHosted.com (DHosted Admin) Date: Thu Nov 17 08:15:24 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] My Hosting Companie Rulez Message-ID: From info at dHosted.com Thu Nov 17 14:16:09 2005 From: info at dHosted.com (DHosted Admin) Date: Thu Nov 17 08:21:12 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] My peoples done care i'm goza advertize here anyway : Message-ID: From info at dHosted.com Thu Nov 17 14:16:48 2005 From: info at dHosted.com (DHosted Admin) Date: Thu Nov 17 08:21:15 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Free Mega Secure Hosting Message-ID: From Support at dHosted.com Thu Nov 17 14:18:37 2005 From: Support at dHosted.com (Dhosted Support) Date: Thu Nov 17 08:21:18 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Post 1000 Message to any Newsgroups Promoting my site and earn $250.00 Message-ID: From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Thu Nov 17 15:56:13 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Thu Nov 17 16:00:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: "Borgholio" wrote in message news:dlgaem$p2c$1@news.spamcop.net... > Older operating systems (such as Windows NT) only partioned the first 4 gig > of a hard drive when the OS was installed. This was because even though NT > used the NTFS file format, it would format the drive with FAT 16 first > (which had a 4-gig limit) then convert it to NTFS. You would need to format > the rest of the drive from within Windows if you wanted it to go straight to > NTFS (and thus access the rest of the drive). I suggest you check your disk > management and see if there's any "unpartioned" or "unused" space on your drive. I got it open- there are definitely two physical drives there and both lights are on - disk management says Disk 0, Basic, 33.91 GB 30MB FAT Healthy (EIS) C: 4.01 G NTFS Healthy (SYstem) Server D: 29.87 GB NTFS HEalthy Disk 1 Dynamic 33.91 GB Online, 33.91 Unallocated So what does this mean? Looks to me like one drive is not being used? From borgholio at storymind.com Thu Nov 17 13:03:27 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Thu Nov 17 16:05:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "Borgholio" wrote in message > news:dlgaem$p2c$1@news.spamcop.net... > >>Older operating systems (such as Windows NT) only partioned the first 4 gig >>of a hard drive when the OS was installed. This was because even though NT >>used the NTFS file format, it would format the drive with FAT 16 first >>(which had a 4-gig limit) then convert it to NTFS. You would need to format >>the rest of the drive from within Windows if you wanted it to go straight to >>NTFS (and thus access the rest of the drive). I suggest you check your disk >>management and see if there's any "unpartioned" or "unused" space on your drive. > > > I got it open- there are definitely two physical drives there and both lights are > on - disk management says > > Disk 0, Basic, 33.91 GB 30MB FAT Healthy (EIS) C: 4.01 G NTFS Healthy (SYstem) > Server D: 29.87 GB NTFS HEalthy > Disk 1 Dynamic 33.91 GB Online, 33.91 Unallocated > > So what does this mean? Looks to me like one drive is not being used? > > Unallocated means it's not partitioned or formatted. Disk 0 is your primary drive, Disk 1 is the secondary drive. It appears that whoever installed the OS did exactly as I said...they formatted the first 4 gigs of Disk 0 as FAT 16 and converted it to NTFS. The rest of Disk 0 was formatted directly to NTFS so you got the full 29.87 gig block. Disk 1 appears to be unpartioned and unformatted, so you could partition / format and get the 33.91 gigs of space available for usage. From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Nov 17 16:18:18 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Thu Nov 17 16:20:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: Borgholio wrote: > > Disk 1 appears to be unpartioned and unformatted, so you could > partition / format and get the 33.91 gigs of space available for > usage. Ain't .geeks just wunnerful? Just saved the Heidster $600! Of course no one solve my internet connection problem *grumble*... From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Thu Nov 17 16:18:14 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Thu Nov 17 16:20:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: "Borgholio" wrote in message news:dlir6p$ao1$5@news.spamcop.net... > > Unallocated means it's not partitioned or formatted. Disk 0 is your primary > drive, Disk 1 is the secondary drive. It appears that whoever installed the > OS did exactly as I said...they formatted the first 4 gigs of Disk 0 as FAT > 16 and converted it to NTFS. The rest of Disk 0 was formatted directly to > NTFS so you got the full 29.87 gig block. > > Disk 1 appears to be unpartioned and unformatted, so you could partition / > format and get the 33.91 gigs of space available for usage. You were, and I was right as well....I knew there was one drive not being used, because what he told me just didn't add up. He said: "You have two drives .. one is for the operating system, is a 37GB, but is formatted and partitioned as a 4GB, The second is where your data lives and it is full .. this is the drive that will need to be upgraded" So we don't need a new drive, we simply need Disk 1 formatted, correct? How is that done? And can the 4GB partition be made bigger? It seems if we have problems, printing, etc, it's because the system disk space is almost full, a bigger partition may help. For a while, people couldn't print big jobs via the server because (i think) there wasn't enough disk space to make a copy of it, or queue it, or something. Once we circumvented the server and printed directly to the printer, the problem went away. But we have 341 mb free space on the 4 G drive. And yes, we have NT Server.... From borgholio at storymind.com Thu Nov 17 13:21:43 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Thu Nov 17 16:25:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Borgholio wrote: > >>Disk 1 appears to be unpartioned and unformatted, so you could >>partition / format and get the 33.91 gigs of space available for >>usage. > > > Ain't .geeks just wunnerful? Just saved the Heidster $600! Of course no one > solve my internet connection problem *grumble*... > > You can't solve evil. From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Thu Nov 17 16:21:34 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Thu Nov 17 16:25:10 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dlis2q$gp6$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > Ain't .geeks just wunnerful? Just saved the Heidster $600! Of course no one > solve my internet connection problem *grumble*... My boss will be told about this, he is lucky to have us (LOL) and he will appreciate my geekiness. I told him $600 and he nearly fainted. "You can buy a whole new computer system for $400!" Did you recycle your modem? According to Comcast that solves everything! They even have a recording that says as much, just so they don't have to talk to you! From borgholio at storymind.com Thu Nov 17 13:23:12 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Thu Nov 17 16:25:15 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "Borgholio" wrote in message > news:dlir6p$ao1$5@news.spamcop.net... > >>Unallocated means it's not partitioned or formatted. Disk 0 is your primary >>drive, Disk 1 is the secondary drive. It appears that whoever installed the >>OS did exactly as I said...they formatted the first 4 gigs of Disk 0 as FAT >>16 and converted it to NTFS. The rest of Disk 0 was formatted directly to >>NTFS so you got the full 29.87 gig block. >> >>Disk 1 appears to be unpartioned and unformatted, so you could partition / >>format and get the 33.91 gigs of space available for usage. > > > You were, and I was right as well....I knew there was one drive not being used, > because what he told me just didn't add up. He said: > > "You have two drives .. one is for the operating system, is a 37GB, but is formatted > and partitioned as a 4GB, > The second is where your data lives and it is full .. this is the drive that will > need to be upgraded" > > So we don't need a new drive, we simply need Disk 1 formatted, correct? How is that > done? And can the 4GB partition be made bigger? It seems if we have problems, > printing, etc, it's because the system disk space is almost full, a bigger partition > may help. For a while, people couldn't print big jobs via the server because (i > think) there wasn't enough disk space to make a copy of it, or queue it, or > something. Once we circumvented the server and printed directly to the printer, the > problem went away. But we have 341 mb free space on the 4 G drive. > > And yes, we have NT Server.... > > Ah...yeah NT Server / Workstation does that annoying FAT => NTFS thing when you install. To format Disk 1, simply right-click it in your Disk Manager and select the appropiate option. It's a piece of cake. :) From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Thu Nov 17 16:24:35 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Thu Nov 17 16:25:17 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: "Borgholio" wrote in message news:dlisbp$ao1$7@news.spamcop.net... > Ah...yeah NT Server / Workstation does that annoying FAT => NTFS thing when > you install. To format Disk 1, simply right-click it in your Disk Manager > and select the appropiate option. It's a piece of cake. :) Are you serious? It's that easy? I'm not going to screw up anything in the networking, the disk will format and magically show up as a new, accessible drive? From borgholio at storymind.com Thu Nov 17 13:27:56 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Thu Nov 17 16:30:18 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "Borgholio" wrote in message > news:dlisbp$ao1$7@news.spamcop.net... > >>Ah...yeah NT Server / Workstation does that annoying FAT => NTFS thing when >>you install. To format Disk 1, simply right-click it in your Disk Manager >>and select the appropiate option. It's a piece of cake. :) > > > Are you serious? It's that easy? I'm not going to screw up anything in the > networking, the disk will format and magically show up as a new, accessible drive? > > Well naturally you should back everything up first, just in case. However, the Disk Manager is designed to be easy. Select the drive you want to work with, right-click, then you can partition, format, assign drive letters, anything you need to do. Once that's done, you should have a bunch of free space. From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Nov 17 16:28:20 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Thu Nov 17 16:30:20 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "Borgholio" wrote in message > news:dlisbp$ao1$7@news.spamcop.net... > > Ah...yeah NT Server / Workstation does that annoying FAT => NTFS > > thing when you install. To format Disk 1, simply right-click it in > > your Disk Manager and select the appropiate option. It's a piece > > of cake. :) > > Are you serious? It's that easy? I'm not going to screw up anything > in the networking, the disk will format and magically show up as a > new, accessible drive? Yeah, it's that easy. There's nothing on that disk right now. From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Nov 17 16:29:12 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Thu Nov 17 16:30:23 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > > Did you recycle your modem? According to Comcast that solves > everything! They even have a recording that says as much, just so > they don't have to talk to you! I bought a brand NEW modem, remember? Still have the same problem. From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Thu Nov 17 16:31:07 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Thu Nov 17 16:35:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dlisll$h83$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > Spamvireslayer wrote: > > "Borgholio" wrote in message > > news:dlisbp$ao1$7@news.spamcop.net... > > > Ah...yeah NT Server / Workstation does that annoying FAT => NTFS > > > thing when you install. To format Disk 1, simply right-click it in > > > your Disk Manager and select the appropiate option. It's a piece > > > of cake. :) > > > > Are you serious? It's that easy? I'm not going to screw up anything > > in the networking, the disk will format and magically show up as a > > new, accessible drive? > > Yeah, it's that easy. There's nothing on that disk right now. HOLY SHIT BOYS! Mr. Boss Man will think I'm a genius! Thanks for the help, I'm so glad I asked! Saved us a lot o' money and a lot o'hassle......We love .geeks... :) From borgholio at storymind.com Thu Nov 17 13:32:35 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Thu Nov 17 16:35:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message news:dlisll$h83$1@news.spamcop.net... > >> >>Spamvireslayer wrote: >> >>>"Borgholio" wrote in message >>>news:dlisbp$ao1$7@news.spamcop.net... >>> >>>>Ah...yeah NT Server / Workstation does that annoying FAT => NTFS >>>>thing when you install. To format Disk 1, simply right-click it in >>>>your Disk Manager and select the appropiate option. It's a piece >>>>of cake. :) >>> >>>Are you serious? It's that easy? I'm not going to screw up anything >>>in the networking, the disk will format and magically show up as a >>>new, accessible drive? >> >>Yeah, it's that easy. There's nothing on that disk right now. > > > HOLY SHIT BOYS! Mr. Boss Man will think I'm a genius! Thanks for the help, I'm so > glad I asked! Saved us a lot o' money and a lot o'hassle......We love .geeks... :) > > We love being geeks. :) From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Thu Nov 17 16:36:20 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Thu Nov 17 16:40:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dlisn9$h87$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > Spamvireslayer wrote: > > > > Did you recycle your modem? According to Comcast that solves > > everything! They even have a recording that says as much, just so > > they don't have to talk to you! > > I bought a brand NEW modem, remember? Still have the same problem. So what's the connection problem? I forget.... From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Nov 17 16:44:46 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Thu Nov 17 16:45:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > > > > I bought a brand NEW modem, remember? Still have the same problem. > > So what's the connection problem? I forget.... Fuggedaboutit. Even Mike Easter couldn't figger it out. From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Nov 17 16:46:22 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Thu Nov 17 16:50:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > > HOLY SHIT BOYS! Mr. Boss Man will think I'm a genius! Thanks for the > help, I'm so glad I asked! Saved us a lot o' money and a lot > o'hassle......We love .geeks... :) You might want to think about moving the print spooler back onto the server after you move some files to the new disk too. From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Thu Nov 17 16:50:05 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Thu Nov 17 16:55:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dlitnf$i6i$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > You might want to think about moving the print spooler back onto the server > after you move some files to the new disk too. > I would have no idea how to do that....actually right now I can't print to one of my printers from the server, no idea why, tried reinstalling and it still won't work. From g2p4i1902 at sneakemail.com Thu Nov 17 21:58:32 2005 From: g2p4i1902 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Thu Nov 17 17:00:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Spamvireslayer wrote: >> Did you recycle your modem? According to Comcast that solves >> everything! They even have a recording that says as much, just so >> they don't have to talk to you! > > I bought a brand NEW modem, remember? Still have the same problem. Well, there's your problem. You are way behind the rest of us on cycling the power on your modem since it is brand new. You need to cycle it twice as much to catch up. And you probably haven't rebooted your computer enough either. Go do that three or four times and then we will talk. From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Nov 17 17:06:27 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Thu Nov 17 17:10:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: Mr K. Mean wrote: > indigo wrote: > > Spamvireslayer wrote: > >> Did you recycle your modem? According to Comcast that solves > >> everything! They even have a recording that says as much, just so > >> they don't have to talk to you! > > > > I bought a brand NEW modem, remember? Still have the same problem. > > Well, there's your problem. You are way behind the rest of us on > cycling the power on your modem since it is brand new. You need to > cycle it twice as much to catch up. And you probably haven't rebooted > your computer enough either. Go do that three or four times and then > we will talk. Not funny.... From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Nov 18 14:18:24 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Maxx Excaliber) Date: Fri Nov 18 14:20:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Strange Google error References: Message-ID: On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 17:23:35 -0800, Anonymous wrote: [snip] > > Yeah, I get that all the time... but then, I use Google a LOT, especially > Google Groups... it takes a lot of searching to exhaustively dig out > information on spammers. > > If you're not hitting Google all that often, then you should check your > computer for / with the following: > > Adware : Lavasoft Ad-Aware > > Spyware : Spybot Search & Destroy, A-Squared > > Viruses : AVG antivirus or the AV program of your choice (as long as it > isn't Norton, Symantec or McAfee... they've gone downhill in their > accuracy and the programs tend to be bloat-ware). > > Rootkits : SysInternals Rootkit Revealer > [snip] > > This assumes, of course, that you're running WinXP. > Actually, the OP stated in their original message that they are running Linux. :-) -- Maxx Excaliber mrmaxx@spamcop.net Just a user, NOT an Admin/Deputy From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Fri Nov 18 14:49:01 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Fri Nov 18 14:50:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Another NT formatting question Message-ID: This is about my server, the one with the extra drive I need to format. The original partition for the drive we're using, Drive 0, has a partition for the OS that's 4.01 gig, the rest of the disk is partitioned at 29.87. Can the OS partition size be increased without major hassle? Right now there are 379 megabytes of free space and that seems to be causing some problems with print jobs. Seems a little too close for comfort, anyway. TIA..... From borgholio at storymind.com Fri Nov 18 12:00:56 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Fri Nov 18 15:05:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Another NT formatting question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > This is about my server, the one with the extra drive I need to format. The original > partition for the drive we're using, Drive 0, has a partition for the OS that's 4.01 > gig, the rest of the disk is partitioned at 29.87. Can the OS partition size be > increased without major hassle? Right now there are 379 megabytes of free space and > that seems to be causing some problems with print jobs. Seems a little too close for > comfort, anyway. TIA..... > > It can be resized but not without formatting the drive. What you'd need to do is re-partition the whole drive...thus wiping out all your data. The only way to install NT on a drive without cutting off a 4 gig chunk is to install NT on a drive that has already been pre-formatted in NTFS. It's a bit of a hassle...and it was fixed in Windows 2000 and above. From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Nov 18 15:34:43 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Fri Nov 18 15:35:06 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Another NT formatting question References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > This is about my server, the one with the extra drive I need to > format. The original partition for the drive we're using, Drive 0, > has a partition for the OS that's 4.01 gig, the rest of the disk is > partitioned at 29.87. Can the OS partition size be increased > without major hassle? Right now there are 379 megabytes of free > space and that seems to be causing some problems with print jobs. > Seems a little too close for comfort, anyway. TIA..... Like I said the other day, look into (or ask here) how to set up the print spooler on the second drive instead of the root drive. One other way you might be able to free up a lot of space on the 4 gig partition -- take a look at your pagefile size. If it's the default size it's way bigger than it has to be -- make it smaller. That should free up quite a bit of space and you may not have to mess with the printer server stuff. I assume that you run EasyCleaner or something on the C: drive on occasion to delete all temp files and the rest of the clutter that always builds up in Winbloze that grow to enormous proportions? From g2p4i1902 at sneakemail.com Fri Nov 18 20:55:26 2005 From: g2p4i1902 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Fri Nov 18 16:00:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Another NT formatting question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Spamvireslayer wrote: >> This is about my server, the one with the extra drive I need to >> format. The original partition for the drive we're using, Drive 0, >> has a partition for the OS that's 4.01 gig, the rest of the disk is >> partitioned at 29.87. Can the OS partition size be increased >> without major hassle? Right now there are 379 megabytes of free >> space and that seems to be causing some problems with print jobs. >> Seems a little too close for comfort, anyway. TIA..... > > Like I said the other day, look into (or ask here) how to set up the print > spooler on the second drive instead of the root drive. > > One other way you might be able to free up a lot of space on the 4 gig > partition -- take a look at your pagefile size. If it's the default size > it's way bigger than it has to be -- make it smaller. That should free up > quite a bit of space and you may not have to mess with the printer server > stuff. > > I assume that you run EasyCleaner or something on the C: drive on occasion > to delete all temp files and the rest of the clutter that always builds up > in Winbloze that grow to enormous proportions? To repartition, you will need a special program. Normally, you can't rewrite the partition table without wiping out the whole disk. There are commercial products that will do this, like Partition Magic: http://www.powerquest.com/home_homeoffice/products/system_performance/pm80/index.html If you are feeling adventuresome, you could do it for free with parted. But you would need to follow a few steps and create a boot disk and stuff like that. http://www.gnu.org/software/parted/manual/html_node/parted_8.html#SEC7 http://www.gnu.org/software/parted/manual/html_node/parted_11.html#SEC10 From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Fri Nov 18 16:39:24 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Fri Nov 18 16:40:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Another NT formatting question References: Message-ID: "Mr K. Mean" wrote in message news:dllf3u$7cr$1@news.spamcop.net... > indigo wrote: > > > > Like I said the other day, look into (or ask here) how to set up the print > > spooler on the second drive instead of the root drive. I still have no idea how to do that.... > > One other way you might be able to free up a lot of space on the 4 gig > > partition -- take a look at your pagefile size. If it's the default size > > it's way bigger than it has to be -- make it smaller. That should free up > > quite a bit of space and you may not have to mess with the printer server > > stuff. Kay, I'll look around.....where? > > > > I assume that you run EasyCleaner or something on the C: drive on occasion > > to delete all temp files and the rest of the clutter that always builds up > > in Winbloze that grow to enormous proportions? Err. NO? Can Cleantemp help? > To repartition, you will need a special program. Normally, you can't > rewrite the partition table without wiping out the whole disk. There > are commercial products that will do this, like Partition Magic: > http://www.powerquest.com/home_homeoffice/products/system_performance/pm80/index.html > > If you are feeling adventuresome, you could do it for free with parted. > But you would need to follow a few steps and create a boot disk and > stuff like that. > http://www.gnu.org/software/parted/manual/html_node/parted_8.html#SEC7 > http://www.gnu.org/software/parted/manual/html_node/parted_11.html#SEC10 "NEVER MIND!" From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Nov 18 16:54:52 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Fri Nov 18 17:00:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Another NT formatting question References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > > > > One other way you might be able to free up a lot of space on the > > > 4 gig partition -- take a look at your pagefile size. If it's the > > > default size it's way bigger than it has to be -- make it > > > smaller. That should free up quite a bit of space and you may not > > > have to mess with the printer server stuff. > > Kay, I'll look around.....where? > settings/control panel/system/advanced tab -- first item is Performance, click on the "settings" button, select "advanced" tab, at the bottom is the virtual memory/page file setting. I suggest cutting it in half, but you might want to post back here what the size is first. If you make it too small your computer will slow down drastically. All I know is that I researched this and the default size is ridicously huge. My machine has it set for 1.5 GB for a 40 GB disk. > > > > > > I assume that you run EasyCleaner or something on the C: drive on > > > occasion to delete all temp files and the rest of the clutter > > > that always builds up in Winbloze that grow to enormous > > > proportions? > > Err. NO? Can Cleantemp help? Nowhere near as good, and I have both. Just google EasyCleaner and download it, it's free and has plenty of cool toys in it. I run it once a week to clear out me temp IE files and other temp files, you will be floored when you see how much disk space is being hogged up by that crap. From SC.10.myspamgobbler at spamcowboy.net Fri Nov 18 13:57:20 2005 From: SC.10.myspamgobbler at spamcowboy.net (Brian) Date: Fri Nov 18 17:00:12 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Another NT formatting question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Spamvireslayer wrote: >> This is about my server, the one with the extra drive I need to >> format. The original partition for the drive we're using, Drive 0, >> has a partition for the OS that's 4.01 gig, the rest of the disk is >> partitioned at 29.87. Can the OS partition size be increased >> without major hassle? Right now there are 379 megabytes of free >> space and that seems to be causing some problems with print jobs. >> Seems a little too close for comfort, anyway. TIA..... > > Like I said the other day, look into (or ask here) how to set up the print > spooler on the second drive instead of the root drive. > > One other way you might be able to free up a lot of space on the 4 gig > partition -- take a look at your pagefile size. If it's the default size > it's way bigger than it has to be -- make it smaller. That should free up > quite a bit of space and you may not have to mess with the printer server > stuff. You can change the drive that your page file is located on. > > I assume that you run EasyCleaner or something on the C: drive on occasion > to delete all temp files and the rest of the clutter that always builds up > in Winbloze that grow to enormous proportions? > > -- Brian SC.10.myspamgobbler@spamcowboy.net From bar_n0ne at hotmail.com Mon Nov 21 10:13:28 2005 From: bar_n0ne at hotmail.com (Berny) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:14:21 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Anyone know how to "PLONK" when forced to read usenet with giggle? Message-ID: Well how to plonk when forced to read usenet with google groups? NANAE has some interesting stuff, but it gets hard to find the meat sometimes with all the "Joe Jared/Brad Jesnes" and similar nonsense. (What is all that about anyway? Wasn't Jared the guy who ran NJABL? the open relay/proxy blocklist?) From pete+usenet at heypete.com Mon Nov 21 01:34:29 2005 From: pete+usenet at heypete.com (Pete Stephenson) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:14:57 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Anyone know how to "PLONK" when forced to read usenet with giggle? References: Message-ID: In article , "Berny" wrote: > Well how to plonk when forced to read usenet with google groups? Not sure if it's possible. Do you have a "real" newsreader? They're generally much more flexible. > NANAE has some interesting stuff, but it gets hard to find the meat > sometimes with all the "Joe Jared/Brad Jesnes" and similar nonsense. (What > is all that about anyway? Wasn't Jared the guy who ran NJABL? the open > relay/proxy blocklist?) He ran relays.osirusoft.com, which was the main distribution point for SPEWS, and had a few other useful tools (relay testing, open proxy database, etc.) also under his control there. No relation, as far as I can tell, to NJABL. The troll in nanae is indeed annoying. Fortunately, he doesn't morph much, making it easy to killfile him. It's all the replies that bug me. I really am curious what the troll think's he accomplishing. Some days, I'm glad for moderated groups...but I'd hate for nanae to go moderated. -- Pete Stephenson HeyPete.com From nobody at nowhere.invalid Mon Nov 21 11:13:41 2005 From: nobody at nowhere.invalid (Steven Maesslein) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:15:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Anyone know how to "PLONK" when forced to read usenet with giggle? References: Message-ID: On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 01:34:29 -0800, Pete Stephenson coughed into spamcop.geeks and left this in : >> Well how to plonk when forced to read usenet with google groups? > > Not sure if it's possible. > > Do you have a "real" newsreader? They're generally much more flexible. The OP might not have NNTP access from where he is. However, if possible, a real newsreader is definitely the way to go, not only for the flexibility it gives you but also because *posting* through garglefroups lumps you in with the frothing kooks who also use that interface (which happens to be in *my* killfile for that very reason). >> Wasn't Jared the guy who ran NJABL? the open >> relay/proxy blocklist?) > > He ran relays.osirusoft.com, which was the main distribution point for > SPEWS, and had a few other useful tools (relay testing, open proxy > database, etc.) also under his control there. No relation, as far as I > can tell, to NJABL. He was DDoSed off the Internet by a spanked spammer a couple of years ago and law enforcement just stood there and watched it happen until they lost interest completely. Now he's in the process of defending himself against another spammer in court. He won the initial case but the spammer appealed. Typical tactic - spammy keeps on beating the dead horse until it runs out of money and wins because said expired equine can no longer defend itself, not through any form of justice. > The troll in nanae is indeed annoying. Fortunately, he doesn't morph > much, making it easy to killfile him. It's easy enough to plonk anything posted through x-privat.org and plus.net since those 2 networks seem to be the preferred networks of Brad Jessness and the Moronis troll. -- Steve From bar_n0ne at hotmail.com Mon Nov 21 16:52:10 2005 From: bar_n0ne at hotmail.com (Berny) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:15:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Anyone know how to "PLONK" when forced to read usenet with giggle? References: Message-ID: "Pete Stephenson" wrote in message news:pete+usenet-SNIP. > > Do you have a "real" newsreader? They're generally much more flexible. > Of course I just can't access a good usenet NNTP server from where I am, I can access news.spamcop.net and even with M$ OE i can plonk if I want here. but there's not much call for it, Trolls seem to have a short half life, and silly tiffs can be ingored, by ignoring the thread. From nobody at nowhere.invalid Mon Nov 21 14:15:39 2005 From: nobody at nowhere.invalid (Steven Maesslein) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:16:25 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Anyone know how to "PLONK" when forced to read usenet with giggle? References: Message-ID: On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 16:52:10 +0400, Berny coughed into spamcop.geeks and left this in : > Of course I just can't access a good usenet NNTP server from where I am, Have you considered a service like SuperNews? Yes, you have to pay for it but it's worth every penny IMO. For one thing, most of the anonymous remailers and proxified sources are already plonked at their end and thus lighten your killfile. A no-binaries subscription with a 1GB/month cap costs $4.95/month. I've been with them for over 2 years now. -- Steve And 1.1.81 is officially BugFree(tm), so if you receive any bug-reports on it, you know they are just evil lies. -- Linus Torvalds From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 21 09:47:42 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:16:44 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Anyone know how to "PLONK" when forced to read usenet with giggle? References: Message-ID: Steven Maesslein wrote: > On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 16:52:10 +0400, Berny coughed into spamcop.geeks > and left this in : > > > Of course I just can't access a good usenet NNTP server from where > > I am, > > Have you considered a service like SuperNews? Yes, you have to pay for > it but it's worth every penny IMO. For one thing, most of the > anonymous remailers and proxified sources are already plonked at > their end and thus lighten your killfile. > > A no-binaries subscription with a 1GB/month cap costs $4.95/month. > > I've been with them for over 2 years now. There are several public usenet servers out there that carry NANAE, I used to be subscribed to one of them - IIRC it was one from Syracuse University. From devnull at spamcop.net Mon Nov 21 09:41:36 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:16:50 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: "Spamvireslayer" | > > > Ah...yeah NT Server / Workstation does that annoying FAT => NTFS | > > > thing when you install. To format Disk 1, simply right-click it in | > > > your Disk Manager and select the appropiate option. It's a piece | > > > of cake. :) | > > | > > Are you serious? It's that easy? I'm not going to screw up anything | > > in the networking, the disk will format and magically show up as a | > > new, accessible drive? | > | > Yeah, it's that easy. There's nothing on that disk right now. | | HOLY SHIT BOYS! Mr. Boss Man will think I'm a genius! Thanks for the help, I'm so | glad I asked! Saved us a lot o' money and a lot o'hassle......We love .geeks... :) So you get a bonus or just more responsibility for the same bucks? From devnull at spamcop.net Mon Nov 21 09:48:56 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:16:57 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dliut3$j0e$1@news.spamcop.net... | | | Mr K. Mean wrote: | > indigo wrote: | > > Spamvireslayer wrote: | > >> Did you recycle your modem? According to Comcast that solves | > >> everything! They even have a recording that says as much, just so | > >> they don't have to talk to you! | > > | > > I bought a brand NEW modem, remember? Still have the same problem. | > | > Well, there's your problem. You are way behind the rest of us on | > cycling the power on your modem since it is brand new. You need to | > cycle it twice as much to catch up. And you probably haven't rebooted | > your computer enough either. Go do that three or four times and then | > we will talk. | | Not funny.... We had a similar problem with my neighbor. Carried a known working modem over (mine) to confirm there was no cabling problem (there was none). We had swapped modems on her system several times and no joy. Turned out to be a batch of bad modems. I have some spare modems around here somewhere. If it'll help I'll try to search them up but be aware everything is in boxes in storage so it'll take time. Alternative would be to take your modems to a location that is known to be working and test from there. From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 21 10:11:45 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:17:56 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: Frog Prince wrote: > I have some spare modems around here somewhere. If it'll help I'll > try to search them up but be aware everything is in boxes in storage > so it'll take time. Alternative would be to take your modems to a > location that is known to be working and test from there. it's not my modem, it works find after I renew my IP address. For some reason the computer won't recognize the modem on bootup (or let it connect, more precisely) From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 21 11:12:41 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:18:21 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Anybody know how to exclude some google results? References: Message-ID: <4381F1F9.184AC103@spamcop.net> "Mr K. Mean" wrote: > > There are some websites that are always at the top of the search results > for certain technical questions I have and search for, but do not > actually allow you to see the answers. I find this very annoying. > (Yes, I'm talking about you experts-exchange.) Is there some way I can > tell google to never ever show any results from them? I believe you can add "-domain.tld" to exclude these references. (Or at least push them down in the list.) -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From MikeE at ster.invalid Mon Nov 21 08:21:43 2005 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:18:27 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Anybody know how to exclude some google results? References: Message-ID: Mr K. Mean wrote: > There are some websites that are always at the top of the search > results for certain technical questions I have and search for, but do > not actually allow you to see the answers. I find this very annoying. > (Yes, I'm talking about you experts-exchange.) Is there some way I > can tell google to never ever show any results from them? Yes, but I don't think it is worth the trouble. In googleweb advanced, in the same Domain place you can use to limit the search to a domainname, you can use 'Don't' instead of Only return results from the site or domain [blank] -- where you would make blank be experts-exchange.com You can also accomplish that by attaching the operator '-site:experts-exchange.com' [without quotes] to your query. But, I find the returns from that forum useful sometimes. The ad gets in the way and sometimes it only want to refer you to a pay page, but it also has useful free results. It would be nice if you could tell if the google hit was 'empty' on just a question, or if it has results from free replies there before clicking on the google link to go to the site -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From nobody at nowhere.invalid Mon Nov 21 17:32:36 2005 From: nobody at nowhere.invalid (Steven Maesslein) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:18:31 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Anybody know how to exclude some google results? References: <4381F1F9.184AC103@spamcop.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 11:12:41 -0500, Kenneth Brody coughed into spamcop.geeks and left this in <4381F1F9.184AC103@spamcop.net>: > I believe you can add "-domain.tld" to exclude these references. (Or at > least push them down in the list.) Nearly. use -site:domain.tld to exclude results from *.domain.tld. -- Steve Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats. -- Howard Aiken From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Mon Nov 21 11:26:28 2005 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:19:20 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Anybody know how to exclude some google results? References: Message-ID: In article , "Mr K. Mean" writes: > There are some websites that are always at the top of the search results > for certain technical questions I have and search for, but do not > actually allow you to see the answers. I find this very annoying. > (Yes, I'm talking about you experts-exchange.) Is there some way I can > tell google to never ever show any results from them? A search string of: vms 800-53 -site:symantec.com excludes pages from Symantec. From g2p4i1902 at sneakemail.com Mon Nov 21 14:44:26 2005 From: g2p4i1902 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:24:31 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Anybody know how to exclude some google results? Message-ID: There are some websites that are always at the top of the search results for certain technical questions I have and search for, but do not actually allow you to see the answers. I find this very annoying. (Yes, I'm talking about you experts-exchange.) Is there some way I can tell google to never ever show any results from them? From user at domain.invalid Mon Nov 21 12:56:08 2005 From: user at domain.invalid (User) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:24:40 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Anybody know how to exclude some google results? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 21.11.2005 11:26, Larry Kilgallen wrote: --- Original Message --- > In article , "Mr K. Mean" writes: >> There are some websites that are always at the top of the search results >> for certain technical questions I have and search for, but do not >> actually allow you to see the answers. I find this very annoying. >> (Yes, I'm talking about you experts-exchange.) Is there some way I can >> tell google to never ever show any results from them? > > A search string of: > > vms 800-53 -site:symantec.com > > excludes pages from Symantec. Hate to tell ya but using that line above results in a link to: [PDF] Symantec Enterprise Security Manager It's the sixth result. From MikeE at ster.invalid Mon Nov 21 11:06:07 2005 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:24:51 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Anybody know how to exclude some google results? References: Message-ID: User wrote: > Larry Kilgallen wrote: >> vms 800-53 -site:symantec.com >> >> excludes pages from Symantec. > > Hate to tell ya but using that line above results in a link to: > > [PDF] Symantec Enterprise Security Manager > > It's the sixth result. That's because the .pdf is at https://www.symantec-enterprisesecurity.com/ which isn't symantec.com You can mess around with wildcards on the operator, but it is more trouble than it's worth. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From nobody at nowhere.invalid Mon Nov 21 21:20:04 2005 From: nobody at nowhere.invalid (Steven Maesslein) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:25:34 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Anybody know how to exclude some google results? References: Message-ID: On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 12:56:08 -0600, User coughed into spamcop.geeks and left this in : >> A search string of: >> >> vms 800-53 -site:symantec.com >> >> excludes pages from Symantec. > > Hate to tell ya but using that line above results in a link to: > > [PDF] Symantec Enterprise Security Manager > > It's the sixth result. But it's not on symantec.com, it's on www.symantec-enterprisesecurity.com Look at the URL. -- Steve If at first you don't succeed, redefine success. From g2p4i1902 at sneakemail.com Mon Nov 21 20:31:26 2005 From: g2p4i1902 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:25:52 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Anybody know how to exclude some google results? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Mr K. Mean wrote: >> There are some websites that are always at the top of the search >> results for certain technical questions I have and search for, but do >> not actually allow you to see the answers. I find this very annoying. >> (Yes, I'm talking about you experts-exchange.) Is there some way I >> can tell google to never ever show any results from them? > > Yes, but I don't think it is worth the trouble. > > In googleweb advanced, in the same Domain place you can use to limit the > search to a domainname, you can use 'Don't' instead of Only return > results from the site or domain [blank] -- where you would make blank be > experts-exchange.com > > You can also accomplish that by attaching the operator > '-site:experts-exchange.com' [without quotes] to your query. > > But, I find the returns from that forum useful sometimes. The ad gets > in the way and sometimes it only want to refer you to a pay page, but it > also has useful free results. It would be nice if you could tell if the > google hit was 'empty' on just a question, or if it has results from > free replies there before clicking on the google link to go to the site Ok, sounds like a pain. Maybe I can work up something in Privoxy to maybe edit requests to google, or maybe I could hack something in Firefox, like how it constructs the search url or something. I'll have to play around with it a bit. I find experts-exchange just about as irritating as the lyrics websites. So many of them don't actually have any, they just have lots of metatags that pretend they have the ones I want and what you actually end up is on a page with a zillion ads and no actual content. Total bottom feeders. From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Mon Nov 21 15:39:39 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:25:54 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Another NT formatting question References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dllip2$fn7$1@news.spamcop.net... > > settings/control panel/system/advanced tab -- first item is Performance, > click on the "settings" button, select "advanced" tab, at the bottom is the > virtual memory/page file setting. I suggest cutting it in half, but you > might want to post back here what the size is first. If you make it too > small your computer will slow down drastically. All I know is that I > researched this and the default size is ridicously huge. My machine has it > set for 1.5 GB for a 40 GB disk. Mine is set for 768 mb, 1.5 being the largest it can be set for. > Nowhere near as good, and I have both. Just google EasyCleaner and download > it, it's free and has plenty of cool toys in it. I run it once a week to > clear out me temp IE files and other temp files, you will be floored when > you see how much disk space is being hogged up by that crap. I downloaded it and will run it fully when fewer people are here and using stuff on the server. I'll run another backup tonight too, on the registry. I did the Disk Usage utility though, it says: Programs 15% Exchange 14% WinNT 37% Free 8% From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 21 16:01:54 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:27:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Another NT formatting question References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: I did the Disk Usage utility though, it says: > > Programs 15% > Exchange 14% > WinNT 37% > Free 8% You're missing 30% somewhere..... From nobody at nowhere.invalid Mon Nov 21 22:08:09 2005 From: nobody at nowhere.invalid (Steven Maesslein) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:27:28 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Anybody know how to exclude some google results? References: Message-ID: On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 20:31:26 +0000, Mr K. Mean coughed into spamcop.geeks and left this in : > Ok, sounds like a pain. Maybe I can work up something in Privoxy to > maybe edit requests to google, or maybe I could hack something in > Firefox, like how it constructs the search url or something. I'll have > to play around with it a bit. Simply add -site:experts-exchange.com to the search criteria. -- Steve Sign spotted on a repair shop door: WE CAN REPAIR ANYTHING. (PLEASE KNOCK HARD ON THE DOOR - THE BELL DOESN'T WORK) From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Mon Nov 21 16:54:23 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:27:48 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Another NT formatting question References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dltck3$1r7$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > Spamvireslayer wrote: > I did the Disk Usage utility though, it says: > > > > Programs 15% > > Exchange 14% > > WinNT 37% > > Free 8% > > You're missing 30% somewhere..... There are some unidentified chunks 6 and 2%, pagefile sys is 16%, (forgot that one). From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Mon Nov 21 16:55:10 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:27:50 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dlso3h$ntd$1@news.spamcop.net... > > it's not my modem, it works find after I renew my IP address. For some > reason the computer won't recognize the modem on bootup (or let it connect, > more precisely) Does it have anything to do with a dynamic IP? From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 21 17:05:15 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:27:52 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Another NT formatting question References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > > There are some unidentified chunks 6 and 2%, pagefile sys is 16%, > (forgot that one). Wait a sec -- you said your pagefile was only 700 something MB. That doesn't match up with taking 16% of your drive....or is that 16% of the 4 gig partition? From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 21 17:05:44 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:27:55 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geek Squad, Geeks on Call - anyone had experience? References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message > news:dlso3h$ntd$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > it's not my modem, it works find after I renew my IP address. For > > some reason the computer won't recognize the modem on bootup (or > > let it connect, more precisely) > > Does it have anything to do with a dynamic IP? I have no idea. DCHP is enabled though. From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Mon Nov 21 17:43:34 2005 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Mon Nov 21 23:28:12 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Anybody know how to exclude some google results? References: Message-ID: In article , User writes: > On 21.11.2005 11:26, Larry Kilgallen wrote: > > --- Original Message --- > >> In article , "Mr K. Mean" writes: >>> There are some websites that are always at the top of the search results >>> for certain technical questions I have and search for, but do not >>> actually allow you to see the answers. I find this very annoying. >>> (Yes, I'm talking about you experts-exchange.) Is there some way I can >>> tell google to never ever show any results from them? >> >> A search string of: >> >> vms 800-53 -site:symantec.com >> >> excludes pages from Symantec. > > Hate to tell ya but using that line above results in a link to: > > [PDF] Symantec Enterprise Security Manager > > It's the sixth result. That page is from another domain Symantec owns. Google only supports omitting one domain. From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Nov 22 09:26:13 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (TimeLord) Date: Tue Nov 22 04:30:07 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Anybody know how to exclude some google results? References: Message-ID: Is it possible to block more than one domain using the method 'xxxxxx -site:symantec.com'? Kev From nobody at nowhere.invalid Tue Nov 22 11:36:03 2005 From: nobody at nowhere.invalid (Steven Maesslein) Date: Tue Nov 22 05:40:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Anybody know how to exclude some google results? References: Message-ID: On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 09:26:13 -0000, TimeLord coughed into spamcop.geeks and left this in : > Is it possible to block more than one domain using the method > 'xxxxxx -site:symantec.com'? Yes. Simply cumulate the various -site:xxxxx constructs you want. Want to know how I found out? I spent all of 5 seconds trying... -- Steve guru, n: A computer owner who can read the manual. From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Tue Nov 22 08:42:40 2005 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Tue Nov 22 09:45:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Anybody know how to exclude some google results? References: Message-ID: In article , Steven Maesslein writes: > On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 09:26:13 -0000, TimeLord coughed into spamcop.geeks > and left this in : > >> Is it possible to block more than one domain using the method >> 'xxxxxx -site:symantec.com'? > > Yes. Simply cumulate the various -site:xxxxx constructs you want. > > Want to know how I found out? I spent all of 5 seconds trying... I tried the same experiment and got different results. From nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net Tue Nov 22 11:34:59 2005 From: nobody at devnulll.spamcop.net (Spamvireslayer) Date: Tue Nov 22 11:40:12 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Another NT formatting question References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:dltgar$3hk$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Wait a sec -- you said your pagefile was only 700 something MB. That doesn't > match up with taking 16% of your drive....or is that 16% of the 4 gig > partition? Yep, that's 16% of the 4 gig partition From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Nov 22 16:00:00 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Nov 22 16:05:13 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Another NT formatting question References: Message-ID: Spamvireslayer wrote: > "indigo" wrote in message > news:dltgar$3hk$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > Wait a sec -- you said your pagefile was only 700 something MB. > > That doesn't match up with taking 16% of your drive....or is that > > 16% of the 4 gig partition? > > Yep, that's 16% of the 4 gig partition Run EasyCleaner yet? From borgholio at storymind.com Wed Nov 23 12:00:49 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Wed Nov 23 15:05:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Interesting entry in my Firewall log Message-ID: Nov/23/2005 10:27:47 Ping of Death Detect 84.60.21.252:33765 69.110.132.85:6346 Packet Dropped Ping of Death? That's a new one. From g2p4i1902 at sneakemail.com Wed Nov 23 20:38:12 2005 From: g2p4i1902 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Wed Nov 23 15:40:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Interesting entry in my Firewall log In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Borgholio wrote: > Nov/23/2005 10:27:47 > Ping of Death Detect 84.60.21.252:33765 69.110.132.85:6346 > Packet Dropped > > Ping of Death? That's a new one. The ping of death is ancient. Wasn't that like 1998 or so? From kenbrody at spamcop.net Wed Nov 23 15:42:57 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Wed Nov 23 15:45:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Interesting entry in my Firewall log References: Message-ID: <4384D451.136415DE@spamcop.net> Borgholio wrote: > > Nov/23/2005 10:27:47 > Ping of Death Detect 84.60.21.252:33765 69.110.132.85:6346 Packet Dropped > > Ping of Death? That's a new one. http://www.google.com/search?q=%22ping+of+death%22 http://www.insecure.org/sploits/ping-o-death.html Description: gazillions of machines can be crashed by sending IP packets that exceed the maximum legal length (65535 octets) -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From borgholio at storymind.com Wed Nov 23 12:46:09 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Wed Nov 23 15:50:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Interesting entry in my Firewall log In-Reply-To: <4384D451.136415DE@spamcop.net> References: <4384D451.136415DE@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Kenneth Brody wrote: > Borgholio wrote: > >>Nov/23/2005 10:27:47 >>Ping of Death Detect 84.60.21.252:33765 69.110.132.85:6346 Packet Dropped >> >>Ping of Death? That's a new one. > > > http://www.google.com/search?q=%22ping+of+death%22 > > http://www.insecure.org/sploits/ping-o-death.html > > Description: gazillions of machines can be crashed by sending IP > packets that exceed the maximum legal length (65535 octets) > Nice to know my firewall caught it. I just felt it was interesting. The IP address that it came from seems familiar too...I think it might be a black-hat ISP that I larted a Nigerian Scammer to. From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Wed Nov 23 21:26:06 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Wed Nov 23 21:30:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Interesting entry in my Firewall log References: <4384D451.136415DE@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Borgholio" wrote in message news:dm2ked$8rd$1@news.spamcop.net... > Nice to know my firewall caught it. I just felt it was interesting. The IP > address that it came from seems familiar too...I think it might be a > black-hat ISP that I larted a Nigerian Scammer to. Once I went to a legitimate spiritual site and immediately thereafter got an attempt by 'Wicked Witch' Thought that was weird. Miss Betsy From g2p4i1902 at sneakemail.com Thu Nov 24 07:08:11 2005 From: g2p4i1902 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Thu Nov 24 03:05:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Interesting entry in my Firewall log In-Reply-To: References: <4384D451.136415DE@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Borgholio wrote: > Kenneth Brody wrote: >> Borgholio wrote: >> >>> Nov/23/2005 10:27:47 >>> Ping of Death Detect 84.60.21.252:33765 >>> 69.110.132.85:6346 Packet Dropped >>> >>> Ping of Death? That's a new one. >> >> http://www.google.com/search?q=%22ping+of+death%22 >> >> http://www.insecure.org/sploits/ping-o-death.html >> >> Description: gazillions of machines can be crashed by sending IP >> packets that exceed the maximum legal length (65535 octets) > > Nice to know my firewall caught it. I just felt it was interesting. > The IP address that it came from seems familiar too...I think it might > be a black-hat ISP that I larted a Nigerian Scammer to. Sort of lame of them though. I mean at the time it was pretty devastating. It would instantly crash most operating systems and a whole variety of routers and switches. But Linux had it patched in maybe two hours and Windows took a day or two, but within a very short time, most everybody had handled the problem. So, to try it nearly a decade later seems a bit ineffective. From borgholio at storymind.com Thu Nov 24 01:25:57 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Thu Nov 24 04:30:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Interesting entry in my Firewall log In-Reply-To: References: <4384D451.136415DE@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Mr K. Mean wrote: > Borgholio wrote: > >> Kenneth Brody wrote: >> >>> Borgholio wrote: >>> >>>> Nov/23/2005 10:27:47 >>>> Ping of Death Detect 84.60.21.252:33765 >>>> 69.110.132.85:6346 Packet Dropped >>>> >>>> Ping of Death? That's a new one. >>> >>> >>> http://www.google.com/search?q=%22ping+of+death%22 >>> >>> http://www.insecure.org/sploits/ping-o-death.html >>> >>> Description: gazillions of machines can be crashed by sending IP >>> packets that exceed the maximum legal length (65535 octets) >> >> >> Nice to know my firewall caught it. I just felt it was interesting. >> The IP address that it came from seems familiar too...I think it might >> be a black-hat ISP that I larted a Nigerian Scammer to. > > > Sort of lame of them though. I mean at the time it was pretty > devastating. It would instantly crash most operating systems and a > whole variety of routers and switches. But Linux had it patched in > maybe two hours and Windows took a day or two, but within a very short > time, most everybody had handled the problem. So, to try it nearly a > decade later seems a bit ineffective. I had a "nuke" program that my friends and I used on each other all the time. One of us would get owned in Quake 1 or Descent 1, and we'd use the nuke program to blue-screen them for revenge. :) From borgholio at storymind.com Sat Nov 26 02:39:12 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Sat Nov 26 05:40:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Need help accessing a website... Message-ID: Can't access www.date.com, tracert doesn't go all the way there, but I'm still getting regular update emails that suggest Date.com is still operating. Can anybody else get there? From nobody at nowhere.invalid Sat Nov 26 12:13:59 2005 From: nobody at nowhere.invalid (Steven Maesslein) Date: Sat Nov 26 06:15:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Need help accessing a website... References: Message-ID: On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 02:39:12 -0800, Borgholio coughed into spamcop.geeks and left this in : > Can't access www.date.com, tracert doesn't go all the way there, but I'm > still getting regular update emails that suggest Date.com is still > operating. Can anybody else get there? Yep. Routing problem between your ISP and Primus Canada? -- Steve QUARK: The sound made by a well-bred duck: From borgholio at storymind.com Sat Nov 26 03:15:41 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Sat Nov 26 06:20:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Need help accessing a website... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Steven Maesslein wrote: > On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 02:39:12 -0800, Borgholio coughed into spamcop.geeks > and left this in : > > >>Can't access www.date.com, tracert doesn't go all the way there, but I'm >>still getting regular update emails that suggest Date.com is still >>operating. Can anybody else get there? > > > Yep. > > Routing problem between your ISP and Primus Canada? > Could be. I'll bug my ISP tomorrow. From user at domain.invalid Sat Nov 26 08:21:57 2005 From: user at domain.invalid (User) Date: Sat Nov 26 09:25:14 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Need help accessing a website... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 26.11.2005 05:15, Borgholio wrote: --- Original Message --- > Steven Maesslein wrote: >> On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 02:39:12 -0800, Borgholio coughed into spamcop.geeks >> and left this in : >> >> >>>Can't access www.date.com, tracert doesn't go all the way there, but I'm >>>still getting regular update emails that suggest Date.com is still >>>operating. Can anybody else get there? >> >> >> Yep. >> >> Routing problem between your ISP and Primus Canada? >> > > Could be. I'll bug my ISP tomorrow. Comes up here ok, the first thing it wants to do is to set a cookie before even displaying the first page, so I denied the cookie. It then wisks me away to a page to tell me all about how to set cookies, etc etc. BUTT .. if you press ESC fast enough, you can get the home page and click anything you want ... From post.please.this.email.is.not.valid at example.com Sat Nov 26 12:17:16 2005 From: post.please.this.email.is.not.valid at example.com (DougW) Date: Sat Nov 26 13:20:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Need help accessing a website... References: Message-ID: User did pass the time by typing: > Borgholio wrote: >> Steven Maesslein wrote: >>> Borgholio wrote: >>> >>>> Can't access www.date.com, tracert doesn't go all the way there, but I'm >>>> still getting regular update emails that suggest Date.com is still >>>> operating. Can anybody else get there? Tracert can get b0rked. Have you tried a web based tracert? http://www.tracert.com/cgi-bin/trace.pl >>> Yep. >>> Routing problem between your ISP and Primus Canada? >> Could be. I'll bug my ISP tomorrow. > Comes up here ok, the first thing it wants to do is to set a cookie > before even displaying the first page, so I denied the cookie. It then > wisks me away to a page to tell me all about how to set cookies, etc > etc. BUTT .. if you press ESC fast enough, you can get the home page and > click anything you want ... Live from here, wget seems to have no problem archiving the site. -- rbg From rbig at bellsouth.nospam.net Sat Nov 26 15:47:18 2005 From: rbig at bellsouth.nospam.net (RB) Date: Sat Nov 26 16:50:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] anti-spam question Message-ID: Bellsouth is my ISP. They have a Mail Guard feature which I assume is a spam filter. I further assume the spam filter is a pretty good one. Problem being I'm getting approx 10 spam emails/day that get around the ISP filter, somehow. Are the spammers getting so good they can defeat the various filters and anti-spam programs by using carefully selected subject line word choices? I forward all my spam emails to the Bellsouth spam abuse reporting facility. But, not clear as to what good that may do. My impression is that the spammers are quite agile and have the ability to sidestep indefinitely whenever they get shut down under a given email address---i.e., they pop up again under a new one. Any further steps I can take to minimize the problem? From pete+usenet at heypete.com Sat Nov 26 14:58:34 2005 From: pete+usenet at heypete.com (Pete Stephenson) Date: Sat Nov 26 18:00:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: anti-spam question References: Message-ID: In article , "RB" wrote: > Bellsouth is my ISP. They have a Mail Guard feature which I assume is a > spam filter. I further assume the spam filter is a pretty good one. > > Problem being I'm getting approx 10 spam emails/day that get around the ISP > filter, somehow. > > Are the spammers getting so good they can defeat the various filters and > anti-spam programs by using carefully selected subject line word choices? Not just through subject words, but through the words used in the body of the message itself, as well as the actual source of the message on the internet. As to the content-based filtering, it's pretty trivial to evade specific word filters ("viagra" becomes "v!@gra", "v1agra", v1 agra" or something equally obfuscated). It's quite difficult for pattern-matching filters to keep track of all the different versions of a particular word. Other types of filters assign "weights" to various words. Things like "the", "and", and so forth are weighted neutral, as they're used in both spam and non-spam alike. Words like "viagra", "breast enlargement", and "bullet-proof hosting" are used much more commonly in spam, and thus are assigned a more "spammy" weight. Some spammers will put a lot of gibberish words, phrases, quotes from literature, etc. at the bottom of their message so as to put more "good" words in the message in the hopes of eluding such filters. Many filters these days are based on where on the internet the message comes from. My incoming mail rejects all mail coming from IP addresses assigned to China, Korea, and Taiwan as well as those listed by other blacklists (SpamCop, Spamhaus, a few open-proxy lists, etc.). I conduct no business or personal communication with anyone in East Asia, yet receive hundreds of spams per day. Thus, it's not terribly difficult for me to simply reject all mail from those countries as spam; I lose no legitimate email. These types of filters may be absolute (No mail from China, period.), or variable weight (the fact that the mail originates from China "weights" it a bit more towards "possible spam"). I'm not sure which methods BellSouth uses, but they've likely had to strike some sort of middle ground. Their customers communicate with people all over the world, and it would be inappropriate for them to simply reject all mail from China or Korea. In general, customers don't mind getting a few "false negatives" (spam that is marked as "legitimate" mail and comes through filters), but strongly dislike "false positives" (legit mail marked as spam). > I forward all my spam emails to the Bellsouth spam abuse reporting facility. > But, not clear as to what good that may do. It's possible it goes into some sort of database that is used to generate their filters. They then know what words, phrases, and so forth are considered "spammy" and it helps to tune their filters. > My impression is that the spammers are quite agile and have the ability to > sidestep indefinitely whenever they get shut down under a given email > address---i.e., they pop up again under a new one. Indeed, they are quite agile. Unfortunately, they almost never send mail from an actual working email address, but use a forged or non-existent email addresses. But yes, they are agile in regards to how they format their messages and from where they actually send them from. > Any further steps I can take to minimize the problem? I'm not sure what kind of mail client you use, but it may behoove you to use on that has client-side filtering (such as Thunderbird, Eudora, or some other similar one). Still, only getting ten spams a day that elude the server-side filters is quite good. I get about a hundred or so. -- Pete Stephenson HeyPete.com From MikeE at ster.invalid Sat Nov 26 15:27:26 2005 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sat Nov 26 18:30:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: anti-spam question References: Message-ID: RB wrote: > Bellsouth is my ISP. They have a Mail Guard feature which I assume > is a spam filter. BS's MG is a spamfilter which you can turn on or off and configur to review the caught spam or not. It is also a virus filter which you cannot turn off. http://help.bellsouth.net/bellsouth/asp/contentview.asp?sprt_cid=f0361a2a%2Df0b4%2D4a1b%2Da044%2D6ded95bc31e8 FAQ: MailGuard > I further assume the spam filter is a pretty good > one. The only way you will get a picture of the caught spam and the uncaught spam and the false positives is to use a client side filter which is personally configured for your own needs [you could configure to only allow your whitelisted mail, for example] and to also compare what is caught with what is missed and what shouldn't have been caught. > Problem being I'm getting approx 10 spam emails/day that get around > the ISP filter, somehow. Most people find that their ISP's filter doesn't get nearly all of their spam. Some also find that there are false positives, which they will never see if they don't use the review feature; and some ISPs don't provide a review feature -- and those which do, typically turn it off by default. > I forward all my spam emails to the Bellsouth spam abuse reporting > facility. But, not clear as to what good that may do. Theoretically, reported spams are supposed to go into a system for enhancing the filter. But I read an article written by an exec for an enterprise level spamfiltering system called Brightmail which is used by a great many ISPs which said that the spams submitted by users were so often 'flawed' [not really spam] that they preferred to rely on their own internal system of professionals working with their system of traps and other sources than use the user submitted spam. My provider has an address for the users to submit spams, and I argue that doing so is a waste of the user's time. > Any further steps I can take to minimize the problem? Review your provider trapped spam by configuring as the faq advises for review and employ a user-side filter. I use SpamPal. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From rbig at bellsouth.nospam.net Sat Nov 26 17:55:28 2005 From: rbig at bellsouth.nospam.net (RB) Date: Sat Nov 26 19:00:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: anti-spam question References: Message-ID: Good info, guys. Thanks. One thing to add is that the Mail Guard thing at Bellsouth does have a review feature, and it traps very few emails I want to receive. It's very good in that regard. Only in the last 6 mos or so have more spam emails gotten through the hoops to my pc, so something has changed. I assumed it was the spammers getting smarter at how to beat the filters. From user at domain.invalid Sat Nov 26 23:02:38 2005 From: user at domain.invalid (User) Date: Sun Nov 27 00:05:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: anti-spam question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 26.11.2005 17:55, RB wrote: --- Original Message --- > Good info, guys. Thanks. > > One thing to add is that the Mail Guard thing at Bellsouth does have a > review feature, and it traps very few emails I want to receive. It's very > good in that regard. > > Only in the last 6 mos or so have more spam emails gotten through the hoops > to my pc, so something has changed. I assumed it was the spammers getting > smarter at how to beat the filters. > > Either turn the filter OFF and get 200 spams daily or turn it ON and be happy to only get 10 ... :-) My mail server rejects 4000+ spams daily for a little over 100 mail clients. I run the latest SpamAssassin, RBL's and ClamAV (anti-virus). From nobody at nowhere.invalid Sun Nov 27 10:50:35 2005 From: nobody at nowhere.invalid (Steven Maesslein) Date: Sun Nov 27 04:55:29 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: anti-spam question References: Message-ID: On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 23:02:38 -0600, User coughed into spamcop.geeks and left this in : > My mail server rejects 4000+ spams daily for a little over 100 mail > clients. I run the latest SpamAssassin, RBL's and ClamAV (anti-virus). Actually that's not a bad ratio. 40 spams/day/client. Here it's nearer 2000/day for 4 clients. That's 12.5 times more than you per day per client. -- Steve Bills travel through mail at twice the speed of checks. From user at domain.invalid Sun Nov 27 08:34:03 2005 From: user at domain.invalid (User) Date: Sun Nov 27 09:35:14 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: anti-spam question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 27.11.2005 03:50, Steven Maesslein wrote: --- Original Message --- > On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 23:02:38 -0600, User coughed into spamcop.geeks and > left this in : > >> My mail server rejects 4000+ spams daily for a little over 100 mail >> clients. I run the latest SpamAssassin, RBL's and ClamAV (anti-virus). > > Actually that's not a bad ratio. 40 spams/day/client. > > Here it's nearer 2000/day for 4 clients. That's 12.5 times more than you > per day per client. > Yah, not too bad considering that I have ONE user that insists on leaving his trail EVERYwhere he goes and then has the audacity to complain that my filters don't work ... :-) My own spams that get past the filters count for about 1/2 dozen daily if that much and those are mostly "You've won the lottery" and maybe a 419 or two here and there. From devnull at spamcop.net Sun Nov 27 13:00:37 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Sun Nov 27 13:10:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Need help accessing a website... References: Message-ID: "Borgholio" wrote in message news:dm9e0f$idh$1@news.spamcop.net... | Can't access www.date.com, tracert doesn't go all the way there, but I'm | still getting regular update emails that suggest Date.com is still | operating. Can anybody else get there? Seems to work from Western NC. I'm on Charter cable. From devnull at spamcop.net Sun Nov 27 13:08:37 2005 From: devnull at spamcop.net (Frog Prince) Date: Sun Nov 27 13:10:08 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: anti-spam question References: Message-ID: "User" | > | >> My mail server rejects 4000+ spams daily for a little over 100 mail | >> clients. I run the latest SpamAssassin, RBL's and ClamAV (anti-virus). | > | > Actually that's not a bad ratio. 40 spams/day/client. | > | > Here it's nearer 2000/day for 4 clients. That's 12.5 times more than you | > per day per client. | > | | Yah, not too bad considering that I have ONE user that insists on | leaving his trail EVERYwhere he goes and then has the audacity to | complain that my filters don't work ... :-) | | My own spams that get past the filters count for about 1/2 dozen daily | if that much and those are mostly "You've won the lottery" and maybe a | 419 or two here and there. Might let his filer default to off for a day or so ... From gkafrg at microsoft.com Sun Nov 27 23:57:01 2005 From: gkafrg at microsoft.com (Dzon) Date: Sun Nov 27 17:00:23 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Wier bieten Message-ID: a.. Sarge a.. Verkaufs und Marktstande a.. Bauholz a.. Saunenholz a.. Holzprodukte fur Ihren Garten a.. Verpackungen a.. Produkte aus Aluminiumprofil http://www.medison.lt/index.php?lang=de&mID=2 From skiwi at spamcop.net Sun Nov 27 16:34:49 2005 From: skiwi at spamcop.net (Skiwi) Date: Sun Nov 27 19:35:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Seeking *working* driver for Win98 non-SE USB-IDE bridge controller, for Buslink L13 ex HD... Message-ID: Hi, I am banging my head - Buslink's site is all broken links, Google doesn't give many hits, Prolific's site is "odd" and half in Chinese, what a search! You see, I am seeking *working* driver for Win98 non-SE USB-IDE bridge controller, for Buslink L13 ex HD... I was trying to use this 98 SETI-only PC as a sort of wireless NAS (sic, I know!) as a "off site" (sic again) back up of my data by adding this Buslink L13 external USB hard drive... Anyway, TIA: GREG... From MikeE at ster.invalid Sun Nov 27 18:03:18 2005 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sun Nov 27 21:05:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Seeking *working* driver for Win98 non-SE USB-IDE bridge controller, for Buslink L13 ex HD... References: Message-ID: Skiwi wrote: > Buslink's site is all broken links, > *working* driver for Win98 non-SE USB-IDE bridge > controller, for Buslink L13 ex HD... http://www.buslink.com/c_old.shtml#Windows%20ME USB 1.1 HARD DRIVE Windows 98, 98SE, ME, XP, & 2000 Updated Driver: for Improved compatibility and performance. (Resolves Blue Screen issue on some USB Chip Sets) 1. Remove older driver and reboot your pc before installing. 2. Download driver and save to your Desktop or floppy disk. USB HD Driver (PC) Ver. 1.6 http://www.buslinkbuy.com/driver/USBHD/3in1/VER16/3in1.exe 04.30.01 3. Without the USB cable plugged into the computer, Double click the driver on the on the Desktop or floppy (3in1.exe) and follow the onscreen instructions. 4. Turn on the USB Hard drive, I nstall the USB cable and adapter. Trouble Shooting Installation for 98-ME http://www.buslinkbuy.com/Trouble%20Shooting/USB1.1in98-ME.htm , 2000 or XP http://www.buslink.com/driver/USBHD/3in1/VER16/3in1.exe -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From MikeE at ster.invalid Sun Nov 27 18:19:17 2005 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sun Nov 27 21:20:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Seeking *working* driver for Win98 non-SE USB-IDE bridge controller, for Buslink L13 ex HD... References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > http://www.buslink.com/c_old.shtml#Windows%20ME > > USB 1.1 HARD DRIVE Windows 98, 98SE, ME, XP, & 2000 That page came from this descriptive page: http://www.buslink.com/c_table.shtml Support - Product Drivers *The following table includes both products that are current and discontinued. L Series Yellow End Win 98/SE/ME/XP/2000, http://www.buslinkbuy.com/driver/USBHD/3in1/VER16/3in1.exe (alt driver) Win 2000/XP TKL 1 also this one: http://www.buslink.com/c_old.shtml USB 1 HARD DRIVE Windows 98, ME, XP, & 2000 Note: This driver is for the USB 1 drive only. (The P and the L series yellow case only) -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 28 11:04:13 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 28 11:05:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Need help accessing a website... References: Message-ID: Borgholio wrote: > Can't access www.date.com, tracert doesn't go all the way there, but > I'm still getting regular update emails that suggest Date.com is still > operating. Can anybody else get there? Isn't that the site that Michael (some guy who used to post in .social) runs? From g2p4i1902 at sneakemail.com Mon Nov 28 16:23:37 2005 From: g2p4i1902 at sneakemail.com (Mr K. Mean) Date: Mon Nov 28 12:05:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Need help accessing a website... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Borgholio wrote: >> Can't access www.date.com, tracert doesn't go all the way there, but >> I'm still getting regular update emails that suggest Date.com is still >> operating. Can anybody else get there? > > Isn't that the site that Michael (some guy who used to post in .social) > runs? From Canada, right? Wasn't that match.com? From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Nov 28 12:15:02 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Nov 28 12:20:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Need help accessing a website... References: Message-ID: Mr K. Mean wrote: > indigo wrote: > > Borgholio wrote: > >> Can't access www.date.com, tracert doesn't go all the way there, > >> but I'm still getting regular update emails that suggest Date.com > >> is still operating. Can anybody else get there? > > > > Isn't that the site that Michael (some guy who used to post in > > .social) runs? > > From Canada, right? yes Wasn't that match.com? Nope. Some industrious person could probably seach the archives for "date.com", it was part of his sig line, IIRC. From blacklist-me at davjam.org Mon Nov 28 17:44:37 2005 From: blacklist-me at davjam.org (David Bolt) Date: Mon Nov 28 12:45:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Need help accessing a website... References: Message-ID: On Mon, 28 Nov 2005, indigo wrote:- > > >Mr K. Mean wrote: >> From Canada, right? > >yes > >Wasn't that match.com? > >Nope. Some industrious person could probably seach the archives for >"date.com", it was part of his sig line, IIRC. This is from a post made in January 2004, taken from my "save this recipe because it looks interesting" archives: Cream of any soup -- Michael Ellis, IAPP Privacy Manager Date.com Regards, David Bolt -- Member of Team Acorn checking nodes at 50 Mnodes/s: http://www.distributed.net/ AMD1800 1Gb WinXP/SUSE 9.3 | AMD2400 256Mb SuSE 9.0 | A3010 4Mb RISCOS 3.11 AMD2400(32) 768Mb SUSE 10.0 | RPC600 129Mb RISCOS 3.6 | Falcon 14Mb TOS 4.02 AMD2600(64) 512Mb SUSE 10.0 | A4000 4Mb RISCOS 3.11 | STE 4Mb TOS 1.62 From borgholio at storymind.com Mon Nov 28 10:14:53 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Mon Nov 28 13:15:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Need help accessing a website... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: indigo wrote: > Borgholio wrote: > >>Can't access www.date.com, tracert doesn't go all the way there, but >>I'm still getting regular update emails that suggest Date.com is still >>operating. Can anybody else get there? > > > Isn't that the site that Michael (some guy who used to post in .social) > runs? > > Yeah I fired off an email, but given the holiday it's not surprising that I haven't gotten a reply yet. From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Tue Nov 29 05:44:43 2005 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Tue Nov 29 05:45:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: anti-spam question References: Message-ID: "User" wrote in message news:dmcg4k$34v$1@news.spamcop.net... > My own spams that get past the filters count for about 1/2 dozen daily > if that much and those are mostly "You've won the lottery" and maybe a > 419 or two here and there. Why are 419s so hard to catch? They must really work at evading filters. Miss Betsy an almost new internet user From bar_n0ne at hotmail.com Tue Nov 29 15:43:35 2005 From: bar_n0ne at hotmail.com (Berny) Date: Tue Nov 29 06:45:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: anti-spam question References: Message-ID: "Miss Betsy" wrote in message news:dmhbcv$qu8$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Why are 419s so hard to catch? They must really work at evading > filters. Because most of them are written, typed and sent manually, in onesies or twosies, by many individuals. They are not made by machine like most other spam. Really, they work from a handwritten script. In this way they evade most filtering, and they don't show up as a mass mailing on the sender side. These guys get pretty efficient, they can send dozens per hour from a yahoo, or hotmail account. And I'm sure they do cut and paste, but it is stil a mainly manual job. I used to get handwritten Nigerian letters in the early 80's. They'd be sent to all the people listed in professional directories, and whose "Who is" books like the AAAS, or AMA, etc. From kenbrody at spamcop.net Tue Nov 29 10:26:52 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Tue Nov 29 10:35:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Geeky tip of the day - boot errors too fast to see Message-ID: <438C733C.FF31A8C4@spamcop.net> (Okay, so I'm not really going to post a tip a day, but I needed something for a subject line.) Just some random geeky thoughts... If you've ever had a system which won't boot, and an error message flashes by too quickly to read before it starts rebooting, here's a way to capture the message so you can read it. Get your digital camera with video capabilities (or borrow your neighbor's), and capture a movie of your computer booting. Place the camera as close as its focus will allow, estimate the time it will display the error, and start capturing several seconds before that. You can then play back the video on a working computer, and using slow- motion mode, pause the playback at the instant the message appears. Most playback software will allow frame-by-frame forwards and reverse, in case you miss it. (I've had the message appear in a single frame at 30FPS capture.) -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Nov 29 10:52:03 2005 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Nov 29 10:55:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geeky tip of the day - boot errors too fast to see References: <438C733C.FF31A8C4@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Kenneth Brody wrote: > > Get your digital camera with video capabilities (or borrow your > neighbor's), and capture a movie of your computer booting. Place the > camera as close as its focus will allow, estimate the time it will > display the error, and start capturing several seconds before that. > > You can then play back the video on a working computer, and using > slow- motion mode, pause the playback at the instant the message > appears. Most playback software will allow frame-by-frame forwards > and reverse, in case you miss it. (I've had the message appear in a > single frame at 30FPS capture.) > Or do it the simple-minded way -- hammer the pause button on your keyboard during bootup until you snag the error message ;-) From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Tue Nov 29 10:05:16 2005 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Tue Nov 29 11:10:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geeky tip of the day - boot errors too fast to see References: <438C733C.FF31A8C4@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <5fzV4iyOzLak@eisner.encompasserve.org> In article , "indigo" writes: > > > Kenneth Brody wrote: >> >> Get your digital camera with video capabilities (or borrow your >> neighbor's), and capture a movie of your computer booting. Place the >> camera as close as its focus will allow, estimate the time it will >> display the error, and start capturing several seconds before that. >> >> You can then play back the video on a working computer, and using >> slow- motion mode, pause the playback at the instant the message >> appears. Most playback software will allow frame-by-frame forwards >> and reverse, in case you miss it. (I've had the message appear in a >> single frame at 30FPS capture.) >> > > Or do it the simple-minded way -- hammer the pause button on your keyboard > during bootup until you snag the error message ;-) Or keep your machine set to use the serial console on boot, so the graphics screen is not even involved. That is S3 on a VAX and SET CONSOLE SERIAL on Alpha. From BNRAGMAOKKXT at spammotel.com Tue Nov 29 20:58:42 2005 From: BNRAGMAOKKXT at spammotel.com (Canopus) Date: Tue Nov 29 16:00:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geeky tip of the day - boot errors too fast to see References: <438C733C.FF31A8C4@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Kenneth Brody on 29/11/2005 wrote: >Get your digital camera with video capabilities (or borrow your >neighbor's), >and capture a movie of your computer booting. Place the camera as close as >its focus will allow, estimate the time it will display the error, and >start >capturing several seconds before that. If you have a digital camera with multi-frame capture press the shutter button when you boot up and release it when you see the error message flash past. You should have captured five shots and one of them should have the error message on it which you can view on your camera's LCD screen. Use a low resolution setting so there is little delay between shots. -- Rob http://www.flickr.com/photos/canopus_archives/ From nobody at nowhere.invalid Tue Nov 29 22:42:42 2005 From: nobody at nowhere.invalid (Steven Maesslein) Date: Tue Nov 29 16:45:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geeky tip of the day - boot errors too fast to see References: <438C733C.FF31A8C4@spamcop.net> <5fzV4iyOzLak@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: On 29 Nov 2005 10:05:16 -0600, Larry Kilgallen coughed into spamcop.geeks and left this in <5fzV4iyOzLak@eisner.encompasserve.org>: >>> Get your digital camera with video capabilities (or borrow your >>> neighbor's), and capture a movie of your computer booting. >> >> Or do it the simple-minded way -- hammer the pause button on your keyboard >> during bootup until you snag the error message ;-) > > Or keep your machine set to use the serial console on boot, Or use a real O/S that allows you to replay boot messages (think: dmesg) and read them at your leisure. -- Steve Hurewitz's Memory Principle: The chance of forgetting something is directly proportional to ..... to ........ uh .............. From nobody at nowhere.not Tue Nov 29 22:04:02 2005 From: nobody at nowhere.not (Robert Blair) Date: Tue Nov 29 17:05:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: anti-spam question References: Message-ID: On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 11:43:35 UTC, "Berny" wrote: > > Why are 419s so hard to catch? They must really work at evading > > filters. > > Because most of them are written, typed and sent manually, in onesies or > twosies, by many individuals. They are not made by machine like most other > spam. I don't know the last time a 419 was missed the bayesian filter in my email client. Maybe hand written filters will miss some but bayesian filters catch all of mine. -- Robert Blair From anthony.edwards at uk.easynet.net Tue Nov 29 23:35:26 2005 From: anthony.edwards at uk.easynet.net (Anthony Edwards) Date: Tue Nov 29 18:40:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: anti-spam question References: Message-ID: On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 15:43:35 +0400, Berny wrote: > > "Miss Betsy" wrote in message > news:dmhbcv$qu8$1@news.spamcop.net... >> >> Why are 419s so hard to catch? They must really work at evading >> filters. > > Because most of them are written, typed and sent manually, in onesies or > twosies, by many individuals. They are not made by machine like most other > spam. Indeed. 419 Advance Fee Fraud UBE is very similar in content to legitimate email. It is sent invariably in plain text, varies quite considerably from one run to another, and in some cases is actually fairly individually tailored to its recipient. It is designed to look legitimate to its recipients of course, since it purports to be a genuine email containing a business proposition. If its senders used typical spammer tricks such as hashbusters, deliberate misspellings of certain words, odd formatting etc, it would be immediately apparent to any recipient that it was bulk UBE; not the impression that its senders wish to give, who rely on recipients believing that it is especially written and intended *for them*. As a result, 419 UBE tends to be caught far less often by spam filtering than "normal" UBE, although I note that the latest SpamAssassin version (3.1.0) is far more effcient than previous versions in terms of filtering 419 related UBE, based on my own personal (non-work) experience. > I used to get handwritten Nigerian letters in the early 80's. They'd be sent > to all the people listed in professional directories, and whose "Who is" > books like the AAAS, or AMA, etc. I received my first 419 related letter by postal mail in 1979. -- Anthony Edwards * anthony.edwards@uk.easynet.net Abuse Team Manager * Tel: 0800 053 0588 Easynet Ltd * DDI: 0161 227 0707 http://www.uk.easynet.net * Fax: 0845 333 4503 From borgholio at storymind.com Tue Nov 29 17:18:16 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Tue Nov 29 20:20:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Firewalls Message-ID: Been using a hardware firewall for the longest time...but decided to install a software firewall to play around with. I enabled the Windows XP Firewall and naturally enabled logging so I can monitor it's performance. I'm astounded with the number of unknown IP addresses that show up related to port 80. I'm going nuts trying to figure out what is what. :) From pete+usenet at heypete.com Tue Nov 29 17:57:59 2005 From: pete+usenet at heypete.com (Pete Stephenson) Date: Tue Nov 29 21:00:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Firewalls References: Message-ID: In article , Borgholio wrote: > Been using a hardware firewall for the longest time...but decided to install > a software firewall to play around with. I enabled the Windows XP Firewall > and naturally enabled logging so I can monitor it's performance. I'm > astounded with the number of unknown IP addresses that show up related to > port 80. I'm going nuts trying to figure out what is what. :) ZoneAlarm + MyNetWatchman is your friend, and helps sort and report suspicious activities ("attacks") based on relative threat level, how widespread they are, etc. Very handy stuff, and with the right software it can work even with a hardware firewall in the way. -- Pete Stephenson HeyPete.com From jg at coks.net Tue Nov 29 19:23:49 2005 From: jg at coks.net (jg) Date: Tue Nov 29 22:25:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Slightly OT - Re: anti-spam question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/29/2005 3:35 PM Anthony Edwards scribbled: > > I received my first 419 related letter by postal mail in 1979. > Why might it be that I have never received one of those items, while getting the full boat of just about every other spam type? I'm not feeling left out, just curious - could my ISP be doing /something/ right? From post.please.this.email.is.not.valid at example.com Tue Nov 29 21:25:18 2005 From: post.please.this.email.is.not.valid at example.com (DougW) Date: Tue Nov 29 22:30:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Slightly OT - Re: anti-spam question References: Message-ID: jg did pass the time by typing: > On 11/29/2005 3:35 PM Anthony Edwards scribbled: >> >> I received my first 419 related letter by postal mail in 1979. >> > Why might it be that I have never received one of those items, while > getting the full boat of just about every other spam type? > I'm not feeling left out, just curious - could my ISP be doing > /something/ right? Actually I responded to a 419 one time. Told the scammer if they ever bothered me again I would have them taken out to sea and used for bait. Oddly, I never got another 419. :) -- DougW From anthony.edwards at uk.easynet.net Wed Nov 30 12:13:32 2005 From: anthony.edwards at uk.easynet.net (Anthony Edwards) Date: Wed Nov 30 07:15:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Slightly OT - Re: anti-spam question References: Message-ID: On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 19:23:49 -0800, jg wrote: > On 11/29/2005 3:35 PM Anthony Edwards scribbled: >> >> I received my first 419 related letter by postal mail in 1979. >> > Why might it be that I have never received one of those items, while > getting the full boat of just about every other spam type? > I'm not feeling left out, just curious - could my ISP be doing > /something/ right? If your ISP is blocking or filtering your incoming postal mail, I would argue that there are privacy issues involved, and that they are operating well beyond their remit! -- Anthony Edwards * anthony.edwards@uk.easynet.net Abuse Team Manager * Tel: 0800 053 0588 Easynet Ltd * DDI: 0161 227 0707 http://www.uk.easynet.net * Fax: 0845 333 4503 From anthony.edwards at uk.easynet.net Wed Nov 30 12:18:54 2005 From: anthony.edwards at uk.easynet.net (Anthony Edwards) Date: Wed Nov 30 07:20:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Slightly OT - Re: anti-spam question References: Message-ID: On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 21:25:18 -0600, DougW wrote: > Actually I responded to a 419 one time. > Told the scammer if they ever bothered > me again I would have them taken out to > sea and used for bait. Quite a few people make an almost full time hobby of this. See: http://www.419eater.com/ http://www.whatsthebloodypoint.com/ (and links therein) A word of caution though. At the higher levels, those behind 419 Advance Fee Fraud can be dangerous, extremely violent criminals. Arranging to meet such fraudsters in the process of baiting them is probably a bad idea. Arranging to travel to foreign countries (particularly West Africa) to meet them is definitely a bad idea. -- Anthony Edwards * anthony.edwards@uk.easynet.net Abuse Team Manager * Tel: 0800 053 0588 Easynet Ltd * DDI: 0161 227 0707 http://www.uk.easynet.net * Fax: 0845 333 4503 From jg at coks.net Wed Nov 30 08:27:18 2005 From: jg at coks.net (jg) Date: Wed Nov 30 11:30:16 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Slightly OT - Re: anti-spam question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/30/2005 4:18 AM Anthony Edwards scribbled: > On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 21:25:18 -0600, DougW > wrote: > > >>Actually I responded to a 419 one time. >>Told the scammer if they ever bothered >>me again I would have them taken out to >>sea and used for bait. > > > Quite a few people make an almost full time hobby of this. See: > > http://www.419eater.com/ > http://www.whatsthebloodypoint.com/ (and links therein) > > A word of caution though. At the higher levels, those behind 419 > Advance Fee Fraud can be dangerous, extremely violent criminals. > Arranging to meet such fraudsters in the process of baiting them > is probably a bad idea. Arranging to travel to foreign countries > (particularly West Africa) to meet them is definitely a bad idea. > I wasn't going out the door for a passport, but thanks for the advice... From kenbrody at spamcop.net Tue Nov 29 19:33:27 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Wed Nov 30 12:55:15 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geeky tip of the day - boot errors too fast to see References: <438C733C.FF31A8C4@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <438CF357.4A3D112A@spamcop.net> Canopus wrote: > > Kenneth Brody on 29/11/2005 wrote: > > > Get your digital camera with video capabilities (or borrow your > > neighbor's), and capture a movie of your computer booting. Place > > the camera as close as its focus will allow, estimate the time it > > will display the error, and start capturing several seconds before > > that. > > If you have a digital camera with multi-frame capture press the shutter > button when you boot up and release it when you see the error message > flash past. You should have captured five shots and one of them should > have the error message on it which you can view on your camera's LCD > screen. Use a low resolution setting so there is little delay between > shots. Why only five frames? What about when it takes ~30 seconds for the error to be displayed, and the display lasts <1/15th seconds? And, yes, a "real" O/S may have better boot error logging capabilities (though how do you display the log if you can't boot?), but these weren't my systems. -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From nobody at nowhere.invalid Wed Nov 30 19:17:33 2005 From: nobody at nowhere.invalid (Steven Maesslein) Date: Wed Nov 30 13:20:02 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geeky tip of the day - boot errors too fast to see References: <438C733C.FF31A8C4@spamcop.net> <438CF357.4A3D112A@spamcop.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 19:33:27 -0500, Kenneth Brody coughed into spamcop.geeks and left this in <438CF357.4A3D112A@spamcop.net>: > (though how do you display the log if you can't boot?) On the "real" family of operating systems I was referring to, the kind of error message that flashes by in a fraction of a second is not the kind produced by a problem which would prevent the O/S from booting at all. Indeed, if error messages are flashing by then the kernel has already loaded and is either probing hardware or running startup scripts. Either way round, clues to the fsckup will be available by running dmesg. In the event that the system doesn't boot up at all, there's usually a huge great clue stuck on the screen to give the user an idea of what went wrong. -- Steve BASIC: A programming language. Related to certain social diseases in that those who have it will not admit it in polite company. From user at domain.invalid Wed Nov 30 13:22:29 2005 From: user at domain.invalid (User) Date: Wed Nov 30 14:25:04 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: anti-spam question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 29.11.2005 04:44, Miss Betsy wrote: --- Original Message --- > "User" wrote in message > news:dmcg4k$34v$1@news.spamcop.net... > >> My own spams that get past the filters count for about 1/2 dozen > daily >> if that much and those are mostly "You've won the lottery" and > maybe a >> 419 or two here and there. > > Why are 419s so hard to catch? They must really work at evading > filters. > > Miss Betsy > an almost new internet user > > " .. a 419 or two ......" as opposed to several dozen or so ... :-) From user at domain.invalid Wed Nov 30 13:23:18 2005 From: user at domain.invalid (User) Date: Wed Nov 30 14:25:10 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: anti-spam question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 29.11.2005 05:43, Berny wrote: --- Original Message --- > "Miss Betsy" wrote in message > news:dmhbcv$qu8$1@news.spamcop.net... >> >> Why are 419s so hard to catch? They must really work at evading >> filters. > > Because most of them are written, typed and sent manually, in onesies or > twosies, by many individuals. They are not made by machine like most other > spam. > > Really, they work from a handwritten script. > > In this way they evade most filtering, and they don't show up as a mass > mailing on the sender side. These guys get pretty efficient, they can send > dozens per hour from a yahoo, or hotmail account. And I'm sure they do cut > and paste, but it is stil a mainly manual job. > > I used to get handwritten Nigerian letters in the early 80's. They'd be sent > to all the people listed in professional directories, and whose "Who is" > books like the AAAS, or AMA, etc. > > SpamAssassin catches 99% of 'em here. From user at domain.invalid Wed Nov 30 13:25:34 2005 From: user at domain.invalid (User) Date: Wed Nov 30 14:25:13 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Slightly OT - Re: anti-spam question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 29.11.2005 21:23, jg wrote: --- Original Message --- > On 11/29/2005 3:35 PM Anthony Edwards scribbled: >> >> I received my first 419 related letter by postal mail in 1979. >> > Why might it be that I have never received one of those items, while > getting the full boat of just about every other spam type? > I'm not feeling left out, just curious - could my ISP be doing > /something/ right? If you like, I can arrange to have your mailbox overrun with as many as you like so you can feel like "one of the crowd" ... :-) From user at domain.invalid Wed Nov 30 13:34:24 2005 From: user at domain.invalid (User) Date: Wed Nov 30 14:35:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Firewalls In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 29.11.2005 19:18, Borgholio wrote: --- Original Message --- > Been using a hardware firewall for the longest time...but decided to install > a software firewall to play around with. I enabled the Windows XP Firewall > and naturally enabled logging so I can monitor it's performance. I'm > astounded with the number of unknown IP addresses that show up related to > port 80. I'm going nuts trying to figure out what is what. :) Or just run any software utility specifically written for your particular router, such as Wall Watcher for Linksys. Most of what you're seeing are port-scan bots. No problem with INcoming packets, it's the OUTgoing ones that respond to those unknown INcoming ones that bother me !! From borgholio at storymind.com Wed Nov 30 11:36:47 2005 From: borgholio at storymind.com (Borgholio) Date: Wed Nov 30 14:40:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Firewalls In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: User wrote: > On 29.11.2005 19:18, Borgholio wrote: > > --- Original Message --- > > >>Been using a hardware firewall for the longest time...but decided to install >>a software firewall to play around with. I enabled the Windows XP Firewall >>and naturally enabled logging so I can monitor it's performance. I'm >>astounded with the number of unknown IP addresses that show up related to >>port 80. I'm going nuts trying to figure out what is what. :) > > > Or just run any software utility specifically written for your > particular router, such as Wall Watcher for Linksys. Most of what you're > seeing are port-scan bots. No problem with INcoming packets, it's the > OUTgoing ones that respond to those unknown INcoming ones that bother me !! > I've run a few port-scans myself and the only things that even show up are ports 80 and 113...and they're both blocked. Nothing even shows up on my software firewall log. I'm sure these IP addresses are related to websites I visit. From kenbrody at spamcop.net Wed Nov 30 13:10:56 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Wed Nov 30 15:35:16 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Slightly OT - Re: anti-spam question References: Message-ID: <438DEB30.DCF82E15@spamcop.net> Anthony Edwards wrote: [...] > A word of caution though. At the higher levels, those behind 419 > Advance Fee Fraud can be dangerous, extremely violent criminals. > Arranging to meet such fraudsters in the process of baiting them > is probably a bad idea. Arranging to travel to foreign countries > (particularly West Africa) to meet them is definitely a bad idea. Well, there is a big difference between arranging to meet in a foreign country, and actually travelling there for the meeting. Not that the former is necessarily a good idea, either, but it's certainly a lot safer than the latter. -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From kenbrody at spamcop.net Wed Nov 30 15:25:13 2005 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Wed Nov 30 15:35:18 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geeky tip of the day - boot errors too fast to see References: <438C733C.FF31A8C4@spamcop.net> <438CF357.4A3D112A@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <438E0AA9.3B9DB090@spamcop.net> Steven Maesslein wrote: > > On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 19:33:27 -0500, Kenneth Brody coughed into > spamcop.geeks and left this in <438CF357.4A3D112A@spamcop.net>: > > > (though how do you display the log if you can't boot?) > > On the "real" family of operating systems I was referring to, the kind > of error message that flashes by in a fraction of a second is not the > kind produced by a problem which would prevent the O/S from booting at > all. Indeed, if error messages are flashing by then the kernel has > already loaded and is either probing hardware or running startup > scripts. Either way round, clues to the fsckup will be available by > running dmesg. Ah. > In the event that the system doesn't boot up at all, there's usually a > huge great clue stuck on the screen to give the user an idea of what > went wrong. Well, the designers of this O/S didn't say "perhaps we should leave the boot error message on the screen for the user to read", and instead said "let's clear the screen and try booting again". In this case, the error was basically "the bootloader loaded the kernel, but then the kernel couldn't mount the root filesystem". > BASIC: > A programming language. Related to certain social diseases > in that those who have it will not admit it in polite company. Well, when I started with computers 34 years ago, BASIC was the only option available to me. However, I've also had my penicillin since then. :-) -- +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | | | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include | +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ Don't e-mail me at: From nobody at nowhere.invalid Wed Nov 30 22:51:12 2005 From: nobody at nowhere.invalid (Steven Maesslein) Date: Wed Nov 30 16:55:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Geeky tip of the day - boot errors too fast to see References: <438C733C.FF31A8C4@spamcop.net> <438CF357.4A3D112A@spamcop.net> <438E0AA9.3B9DB090@spamcop.net> Message-ID: On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 15:25:13 -0500, Kenneth Brody coughed into spamcop.geeks and left this in <438E0AA9.3B9DB090@spamcop.net>: > Well, the designers of this O/S didn't say "perhaps we should leave the > boot error message on the screen for the user to read", and instead said > "let's clear the screen and try booting again". Right. So you're using an O/S of which the designers would rather sweep the crap under the proverbial carpet instead of showing the user what's up when something does crop up. > In this case, the error was basically "the bootloader loaded the kernel, > but then the kernel couldn't mount the root filesystem". 3 solutions: * Bad disk * Bad cable * Bad controller -- Steve Recorded message on an answerphone: "This is not an answering machine, this is a telepathic thought-recording device. After the tone, think about your name, your number, and your reason for calling.... and I'll think about returning your call." From jg at coks.net Wed Nov 30 21:43:27 2005 From: jg at coks.net (jg) Date: Thu Dec 1 00:45:03 2005 Subject: [SpamCop-Geeks] Re: Slightly OT - Re: anti-spam question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/30/2005 11:25 AM User scribbled: > If you like, I can arrange to have your mailbox overrun with as many as > you like so you can feel like "one of the crowd" ... :-) No thanks, I already live in a crowd...