- main - earth.li

Re: main digest, Vol 2 #51 - 9 msgs
by David Cartwright 23 Feb '03

23 Feb '03

>From: "Ben Norcutt" <ben(a)plextech.co.uk> >To: "alug" <main(a)lists.alug.org.uk> >Subject: Re: [Alug] Wireless WANS (i.e. Norfolk) >Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 12:22:48 -0000 > >I have just started playing with wireless stuff at work and it's great to be >able to wander around with a laptop my boss loves it. I work at Framingham >Earl High School As the Network Mangler and would love to help out if I can. >We have a 2mbit DSL connection going unused during the evening. This would >be fine for general web surfing but there are a number of restrictions that >you need to be made aware of. > >If anyone wants to experiment let me know. Maybe we should have a wireless >antennae building session etc... I have a couple of waps and pcmcia cards at >work. Errrrrmmmm ... I hate to be picky, but wouldn't the education authority or whoever is paying for all this stuff have some kind of problem with you inviting all and sundry to use their network (which presumably contains sensitive information)? If I was the headmaster, the "number of restrictions you need to be made aware of" would include "Connect anyone to this thing without my express permission and you're fired". In last year's UK Networking Industry Awards, of which I'm one of the judges, one of the entries was an educational establishment that was very proud of its new wireless LAN installation. Sadly, at no point did the entry blurb (which was many pages long) include terms like "security" or "encryption" - in fact the implementors were proud that you could surf outside the school buildings on your laptop. They didn't win. By way of a footnote, it's interesting to see how many companies don't turn on security by default. At the Networks Telecom Show at the NEC last June, a friend of mine who runs a super little security product dealership/consultancy was showing me his new toy - a wireless LAN analyser from Vernier Networks. We stood in the middle of the NEC identifying literally dozens of insecure servers on this thing, because the vast majority of exhibitors didn't have security turned on in their wireless installations. Not a problem at a trade show, you'd think, but you must remember that many stands have phone/ISDN links back to the main office, thus giving any old muppet with (in our case) an iPaq and a few hundred quid's worth of software a really nice route into their corporate networks. D.

1 0

Re: main digest, Vol 2 #53 - 10 msgs
by David Cartwright 23 Feb '03

23 Feb '03

> > > Shame Ionica peaked 5 years too early, their technology would be > > > perfect for this kind of thing. > > > > Are you sure it would ? > > > > Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but I'm pretty sure that > regarding > > data throughput Ionica's ill fated network was not capable of much more > than > > a regular PSTN line, anyway from memory network coverage was nearly as > bad as > > ADSL. Absolutely correct. Ionica launched back in the mid 1990s, when I was tech ed of Network Week. From day one we were basically writing things like "Neat idea, but the guy running it sounds like a cowboy and they've forgotten to do any marketing". When we asked Ionica whether we could have anything more than a phone line - ISDN, for instance - the answer was always that the current equipment, running in the current radio spectrum (2.4GHz, I believe it was), couldn't handle it but when the new version came out (11GHz or so, if memory serves) we could have anything we wanted. To say that you can't do 128Kbit/sec ISDN in a 2.4GHz spectrum is, of course, nonsense - if nothing else you could mux it like cellular providers do with multiples of 9.6Kbit/sec channels in GPRS. It may have been fair to say that the kit wasn't up to it, but I can't imagine the equipment vendors didn't have an upgrade roadmap. Interestingly, the Ionica service - where it was available - was excellent by all accounts. You could have multiple numbers with a different ring pattern for each (so dad could have a different ring pattern from mum), caller ID, a 1471 equivalent, and so on - they did all of this long before BT. And the coverage area was okay, if not massive. From what I can see, they just didn't spend the marketing bucks, and got a reputation in the press for being a bunch of wide boys trying to take investors for a ride. In fact there's still an Ionica receiver dish on a house up the road from me - maybe they're hoping the service will come back one day!! Regards, Dave C

1 0

Re: [Alug] Incompatibility and what can I do about it?
by BenEBoy 22 Feb '03

22 Feb '03

On Saturday 22 February 2003 14:41, Chris Walker wrote: > I am still trying to persuade my Acorn to talk to my Mandrake box without > success. My son suggested I look at ipchains and having installed it, it > now tells me 'Incompatible with this kernel'. Strange as I installed them > both from the same CD, Mandrake 9. Ipchains is 1.3.10-6mdk and the kernel > is 2.4.19-16mdk but despite having the upgrader look for upgrades for > ipchains, it can't find any. So I'm stuck now. How do I find an upgrade, > assuming one is necessary, to fix this? Or is there another remedy? Have you seen this in your travels through google? http://www.serial-networking.fsnet.co.uk/linux.htm (step by step guide to connecting acorns with linux) BenE

1 0

Re: [Alug] Incompatibility and what can I do about it?
by Richard Kettlewell 22 Feb '03

22 Feb '03

Chris Walker <linux(a)wymondham.demon.co.uk> writes: > I am still trying to persuade my Acorn to talk to my Mandrake box > without success. My son suggested I look at ipchains and having > installed it, it now tells me 'Incompatible with this > kernel'. Strange as I installed them both from the same CD, Mandrake > 9. Ipchains is 1.3.10-6mdk and the kernel is 2.4.19-16mdk but > despite having the upgrader look for upgrades for ipchains, it can't > find any. So I'm stuck now. How do I find an upgrade, assuming one > is necessary, to fix this? Or is there another remedy? You might very well want iptables instead. I can't see how a packet filter will help you talk to your Acorn, though... -- http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

1 0

Reminder: ALUG Meeting @ Syleham Villiage Hall 23rd Feb 2003
by John Woodard 21 Feb '03

21 Feb '03

Reminder: ALUG Meeting @ Syleham Villiage Hall 23rd Feb 2003 I've updated the wiki to confirm this. If you are coming please add your name to http://www.alug.org.uk/contrib/?23%20Feb . This ALUG meeting will be from 2pm until about 6pm in the normal place at http://www.alug.org.uk/venues/syleham.html the bar will be open. BJ will be there from about 1:00pm putting up tables etc. Cheers, BJ

2 1

Re: [Alug] Wireless WANS (i.e. Norfolk)
by Ben Norcutt 20 Feb '03

20 Feb '03

I have just started playing with wireless stuff at work and it's great to be able to wander around with a laptop my boss loves it. I work at Framingham Earl High School As the Network Mangler and would love to help out if I can. We have a 2mbit DSL connection going unused during the evening. This would be fine for general web surfing but there are a number of restrictions that you need to be made aware of. If anyone wants to experiment let me know. Maybe we should have a wireless antennae building session etc... I have a couple of waps and pcmcia cards at work. Cheers, Ben

1 0

how to assign capabilities to specific process/user
by atit_ldce 20 Feb '03

20 Feb '03

this is atit jariwala final semester student of be computer ldce ahd i want to assign specific capabilities to specific user or process i want this because i want my program that is using setsockopt call to run from other user then root and runnig of setscokopt requires CAP_NET_ADMIN assigned to the user and by default it is assigned to root user only and i want to assign this to specific user thanks _____________________________________________________________________ Get your internet connection from the fastest growing digital network. ICENET visit our site www.icenet.net

3 2

Re: [Alug] IPChains
by Andrew Cartwright 19 Feb '03

19 Feb '03

Chris Walker wrote: > I have Mandrake 9 on my machine and can't look at the drives from another > machine. What puzzles me is that when I run ipchains, I get unknown command. > I thought that it installed and ran by default. Should it? > Chris, IME Mandrake uses iptables, its preferred firewall is shorewall which is configured from the control centre. Having said that you don't have to use shorewall, you can write your own script if you wish. Regards Andy

1 0

Re: [Alug] IPChains
by Brett Parker 19 Feb '03

19 Feb '03

Chris Walker <linux(a)wymondham.demon.co.uk> wrote: > I have Mandrake 9 on my machine and can't look at the drives from another > machine. What puzzles me is that when I run ipchains, I get unknown command. > I thought that it installed and ran by default. Should it? Depends, what's Mandrake 9s default kernel? if its in the 2.4.x series then there is no spoon^Wipchains unless they're being very silly. iptables may be available. Certainly on debian systems unless you let it actually install stuff on the initial setup you have to install the ipchains/iptables packages, so, maybe you managed to do a minimal install of Mandrake... Anyways - just my thoughts at this silly time of night. Brett.

1 0

Slashdot - FTP: Better Than HTTP, Or Obsolete?
by Keith Watson 18 Feb '03

18 Feb '03

> <http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/02/13/2132221> > > An anonymous coward asks "Looking to serve files for downloading > (typically 1MB-6MB), I'm confused about whether I should provide an FTP > server instead of / as well as HTTP. According to a rapid Google > search, the experts say 1) HTTP is slower and less reliable than FTP > and 2) HTTP is amateur and will make you look a wimp. But a) FTP is > full of security holes. and b) FTP is a crumbling legacy protocol and > will make you look a dinosaur. Surely some contradiction... Should I > make the effort to implement FTP or take desperate steps to avoid it?" > So what's the general opinion about FTP vs. HTTP in the GNU/Linux environment? Keith ____________ The Mind is the slayer of the Real The Voice of the Silence.

5 14