Professional Web Applications Themes

sco.com and caldera.com are down - SCO

In article <pan.2003.08.24.01.43.56.251633mtco.com>, Nucleon <tcfelkermtco.com> wrote: >Since yesterday or before, I can no longer access either sco.com or >caldera.com. Across the net, many others are experiencing this, but >nobody seems to know why. Does anyone know what's going on? It dies in InterNAP from what my traceroute tells me. I don't know why. -- Larry Rosenman [url]http://www.lerctr.org/~ler[/url] Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: [email]lerlerctr.org[/email] US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749...

  1. #1

    Default Re: sco.com and caldera.com are down

    In article <pan.2003.08.24.01.43.56.251633mtco.com>,
    Nucleon <tcfelkermtco.com> wrote:
    >Since yesterday or before, I can no longer access either sco.com or
    >caldera.com. Across the net, many others are experiencing this, but
    >nobody seems to know why. Does anyone know what's going on?
    It dies in InterNAP from what my traceroute tells me.

    I don't know why.
    --
    Larry Rosenman [url]http://www.lerctr.org/~ler[/url]
    Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: [email]lerlerctr.org[/email]
    US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749
    Larry Rosenman Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: sco.com and caldera.com are down

    On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 20:43:58 -0500, Nucleon <tcfelkermtco.com> wrote:
    >Since yesterday or before, I can no longer access either sco.com or
    >caldera.com. Across the net, many others are experiencing this, but
    >nobody seems to know why. Does anyone know what's going on?
    Sorry, I have not inside information. However doing a bit of testing,
    I find that the [url]www.sco.com[/url] server and one of the nameservers are
    down. However, some of the boxes are up. stage.caldera.com is up.
    (I'm too lazy to scan the IP block and see if there are any other
    servers that are up).

    Both [url]www.sco.com[/url] and [url]www.caldera.com[/url] are on some kind of load
    balancing contraption which might be the culprit. Dunno.

    08/23/03 21:21:25 dig [url]www.sco.com[/url] ns.calderasystems.com
    Dig [url]www.sco.comns.calderasystems.com[/url] (216.250.130.1) ...
    Authoritative Answer
    Recursive queries supported by this server
    Query for [url]www.sco.com[/url] type=255 class=1
    [url]www.sco.com[/url] A (Address) 216.250.140.112 (down)
    sco.com NS (Nameserver) nsca.sco.com (down)
    sco.com NS (Nameserver) c7ns1.center7.com (up)
    sco.com NS (Nameserver) ns.calderasystems.com (up)
    sco.com NS (Nameserver) ns2.calderasystems.com (up)
    ns.calderasystems.com A (Address) 216.250.130.1
    ns2.calderasystems.com A (Address) 216.250.130.5
    nsca.sco.com A (Address) 132.147.210.253

    Since the web server is in the same IP block as the two working
    nameservers, I can guess(tm) that only the web server is comatose and
    that this is not a connectivity issue.

    [url]www.caldera.com[/url] (216.250.130.1) uses the same nameservers and sits in
    the same IP class C block. No clue why both should decide to go
    comatose at the same time unless it's the load balancer.


    --
    # Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
    # 831.336.2558 voice [url]http://www.LearnByDestroying.com[/url]
    # [email]jefflcomix.santa-cruz.ca.us[/email]
    # 831.421.6491 digital_pager [email]jefflcruzio.com[/email] AE6KS
    Jeff Liebermann Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: sco.com and caldera.com are down

    In article <8ffgkvg0j5fv19gt0bencgbvcf70vqpvtv4ax.com>,
    Jeff Liebermann <jefflcomix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
    >On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 20:43:58 -0500, Nucleon <tcfelkermtco.com> wrote:
    >
    >>Since yesterday or before, I can no longer access either sco.com or
    >>caldera.com. Across the net, many others are experiencing this, but
    >>nobody seems to know why. Does anyone know what's going on?
    >
    >Sorry, I have not inside information. However doing a bit of testing,
    >I find that the [url]www.sco.com[/url] server and one of the nameservers are
    >down. However, some of the boxes are up. stage.caldera.com is up.
    >(I'm too lazy to scan the IP block and see if there are any other
    >servers that are up).
    >
    >Both [url]www.sco.com[/url] and [url]www.caldera.com[/url] are on some kind of load
    >balancing contraption which might be the culprit. Dunno.
    I just talked to the VIAWEST NOCC, and the SCO and CALDERA web/FTP sites
    are blackholed because some lovely miscreants are DDOS'ing them.

    When the attack stops, they'll lift the block
    at InterNAP.

    LER


    --
    Larry Rosenman [url]http://www.lerctr.org/~ler[/url]
    Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: [email]lerlerctr.org[/email]
    US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749
    Larry Rosenman Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: sco.com and caldera.com are down

    On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 20:43:58 -0500, Nucleon <tcfelkermtco.com> wrote:
    >Since yesterday or before, I can no longer access either sco.com or
    >caldera.com. Across the net, many others are experiencing this, but
    >nobody seems to know why. Does anyone know what's going on?
    ;-) It's a real shame isn't it? Sad to see such a useful source of
    lies and threats shutdown. It's especially strange after their
    hilarious attempts to steal Linux from the open source comunity, lie
    about their code being stolen (when all evidence points to them
    contributing the code themselves), then in a final act of desperation,
    attempt to claim the GPL is invalid, since copyright law prohibits
    more than one copy of any software! Oh yes, wasn't their major
    announcement at their "big" annual conference the fact they were going
    to be including Samba 3.0.x in their OS'? That would be the
    Open-source Samba, you know, covered by the GPL. Oh I almost forgot,
    they also bundle a great many open source tools with their crummy
    systems to hide the fact their own stuff stinks!

    Too bad they no longer have any revenue left to put into making their
    products usable or competitive, since everything is paid to second
    rate lawfirms, trying to defend them as the most reviled company in
    the World.

    I honestly can't believe anyone is still using this company's
    operating systems - let's look at the facts:

    1) Their own directors selling shares as quickly as possible.
    The only reason SCOX stock is high is due to the amount of
    short-stock. Noone in their right mind would buy it.
    2) they're infringing upon IBM patents (which luckily cover
    ALL their product lines ;-)
    3) The entire OS community hate them, and support for SCO
    products is likely to be removed from many projects.
    4) The directors are likely to face jail terms for their
    recent defamation and threats sent out to Linux users. Oh
    yes, and for the stock price manipulation.
    5) Their own products stink (believe me, moving from
    OpenServer to Linux is like travelling 20 years forward
    through time!)
    6) Why pay per-seat licencing for an outdated OS, when Linux
    is free, faster, supports much more hardware and all the
    same software (and more)? Oh, and you get the source code!

    Personally I believe sco.com should remain down to save these cretins
    from further humiliation. Every time Darl Greedy McBride opens his
    mouth it's just another avalanche of utter pouring out.

    To anyone still running SCO software, you have my deepest
    sympathies...
    Scott Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: sco.com and caldera.com are down

    On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 15:47:07 +0100, Scott
    <scotttiktok.demon.c.u.o.t.s.a> wrote:
    > - let's look at the facts:
    Let's check the facts.
    > 1) Their own directors selling shares as quickly as possible.
    > The only reason SCOX stock is high is due to the amount of
    > short-stock. Noone in their right mind would buy it.
    See:
    [url]http://biz./t/S/SCOX.html[/url]
    There are as many options exercised as there are sales. The largest
    sale was $261,000. Total insider sales was 1.7% of shares owned by
    officers. As most of the sales were proceeded by options priced under
    $2/share, I would be more than just tempted to sell when the stock
    went to as high as $15/share (and then started to drop). Where is
    your "selling shares as quickly as possible"?
    > 2) they're infringing upon IBM patents (which luckily cover
    > ALL their product lines ;-)
    IBM is the worlds largest patent holder. They patent everything in
    sight. It's almost impossible to do any kind of software without
    locking horns with IBM. For example, XML for ecommerce is allegedly
    patented by IBM.

    [url]http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/main/0,14179,2861528,00.html[/url]
    Of course, IBM is being magnanimous that week and offered free
    royalties to those that will recognize IBM's ownership of ebiz XML.

    In the current legal ing match with SCO, IBM has no reason to be
    so nice, and is defending their software patents. Let's just say that
    IBM picks its opponents carefully.
    Informix:
    [url]http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2000/02/07/daily10.html[/url]
    I'm not surprised that IBM would claim patent infringement as the
    current issue would cast them as the victim should it precipitate a
    judicial or legislative review of the validity of software patents.
    > 3) The entire OS community hate them, and support for SCO
    > products is likely to be removed from many projects.
    I doubt it. However, future support in new products is likely to be
    lacking.
    > 4) The directors are likely to face jail terms for their
    > recent defamation and threats sent out to Linux users. Oh
    > yes, and for the stock price manipulation.
    For what crime? It really depends on how many congress critters one
    owns. Ken Lay and Bernie Ebbers still haven't been indicted by the
    Justice Department. My guess is that they never will be. However,
    the JD has indicted Martha Stuart (not for insider trading, but only
    for covering up her insider trading). High profile proscecution is
    based on politix and not the letter of the law.
    > 5) Their own products stink (believe me, moving from
    > OpenServer to Linux is like travelling 20 years forward
    > through time!)
    I've been using SCO products since Xenix 2.0. My guess that would be
    about 1988. I've been tinkering with Linux since 1.1.13 which is
    about 1994. I do not claim to be an expert on either OSR5 or Linux.
    I have made money with OSR5 but have not been able to do as well with
    Linux. I'll leave it to others to pass judgement on the quality of
    the product as I'm not a programmist.
    > 6) Why pay per-seat licencing for an outdated OS, when Linux
    > is free, faster, supports much more hardware and all the
    > same software (and more)? Oh, and you get the source code!
    Yep. It's difficult to compete with a product that's free. However,
    I don't drive the direction of my customers. I've moved a few servers
    to Linux, but the greatest number of seats (i.e. licensed users) seems
    to be blundering in the direction of various Windoze products, which
    is anything but free.
    >Personally I believe sco.com should remain down to save these cretins
    >from further humiliation. Every time Darl Greedy McBride opens his
    >mouth it's just another avalanche of utter pouring out.
    So much for free speech. Personally, I don't agree with either SCO's
    actions or logic. There are many good people still employed by SCO
    and I suspect many are stuck with my dilemma. How can I defend a
    company without also defending its stupid management actions? I don't
    have an answer. I've kept my big mouth shut in newsgroups and mailing
    lists because any defense of SCO would probably be viewed as a defense
    of SCO's point of view. I probably shouldn't have scribbled this
    message. However, I take a dim view of warped facts and thought some
    comments might be useful.
    >To anyone still running SCO software, you have my deepest
    >sympathies...
    Thank you. I appreciate your concern.


    --
    Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
    (831)421-6491 pgr (831)336-2558 home
    [url]http://www.LearnByDestroying.com[/url] AE6KS
    [email]jefflcomix.santa-cruz.ca.us[/email] [email]jefflcruzio.com[/email]
    Jeff Liebermann Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: sco.com and caldera.com are down


    "Larry Rosenman" <lerlerctr.org> wrote in message
    news:bi9h2d$7dj$1lerami.lerctr.org...
    > In article <8ffgkvg0j5fv19gt0bencgbvcf70vqpvtv4ax.com>,
    > Jeff Liebermann <jefflcomix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
    > >On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 20:43:58 -0500, Nucleon <tcfelkermtco.com> wrote:
    > >
    > >>Since yesterday or before, I can no longer access either sco.com or
    > >>caldera.com. Across the net, many others are experiencing this, but
    > >>nobody seems to know why. Does anyone know what's going on?
    > >
    > >Sorry, I have not inside information. However doing a bit of testing,
    > >I find that the [url]www.sco.com[/url] server and one of the nameservers are
    > >down. However, some of the boxes are up. stage.caldera.com is up.
    > >(I'm too lazy to scan the IP block and see if there are any other
    > >servers that are up).
    > >
    > >Both [url]www.sco.com[/url] and [url]www.caldera.com[/url] are on some kind of load
    > >balancing contraption which might be the culprit. Dunno.
    > I just talked to the VIAWEST NOCC, and the SCO and CALDERA web/FTP sites
    > are blackholed because some lovely miscreants are DDOS'ing them.
    >
    > When the attack stops, they'll lift the block
    > at InterNAP.
    >
    > LER

    I would blame this on sco's management.

    Obviously you can't please everyone, but that doesn't mean you have to go
    so incredibly far out of your way to antagonize a planet full of fresh
    young linux whiz-kid hackers just itching for something to flex their
    muscles on.

    Shrewd.

    It must say somewhere in the very early chapters of the "IT Industry
    Organization Operators Handbook" "Don't off all the hackers on the
    planet unless your servers are deep in a salt mine and not connected to
    the rest of the world and powered off and disassembeled. It doesn't matter
    if you are 'right'"

    --
    Brian K. White -- [email]brianaljex.com[/email] -- [url]http://www.aljex.com/bkw/[/url]
    +++++[>+++[>+++++>+++++++<<-]<-]>>+.>.+++++.+++++++.-.[>+<---]>++.
    filePro BBx Linux SCO Prosper/FACTS AutoCAD #callahans Satriani

    Brian K. White Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: sco.com and caldera.com are down

    On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 05:05:17 +0000, Larry Rosenman wrote:
    > I just talked to the VIAWEST NOCC, and the SCO and CALDERA web/FTP sites
    > are blackholed because some lovely miscreants are DDOS'ing them.
    >
    > When the attack stops, they'll lift the block at InterNAP.
    >
    > LER
    That's interesting, but can anyone confirm it? With some web searching, I
    can only find info about the DDoS on May 2, which SCO was quick to blame
    on Linux users. If there were another one, especially one that has
    continued for at least two days, wouldn't we have heard about it in the
    news?

    It's quiet. Too quiet.

    --
    Nucleon, <tcfelkermtco.com>
    <http://vlevel.sourceforge.net> - Stop fiddling with the volume knob.

    Life is like an ogy.

    Nucleon Guest

  8. #8

    Default ESR urges to cease DOS attack (was: Re: sco.com and caldera.com are down)

    On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 14:20:02 -0400, Brian K. White wrote:

    [snip]
    >> I just talked to the VIAWEST NOCC, and the SCO and CALDERA web/FTP
    >> sites are blackholed because some lovely miscreants are DDOS'ing them.
    >>
    >> When the attack stops, they'll lift the block at InterNAP.
    >>
    >> LER
    >
    > I would blame this on sco's management.
    >
    > Obviously you can't please everyone, but that doesn't mean you have to
    > go so incredibly far out of your way to antagonize a planet full of
    > fresh young linux whiz-kid hackers just itching for something to flex
    > their muscles on.
    >
    > Shrewd.
    >
    > It must say somewhere in the very early chapters of the "IT Industry
    > Organization Operators Handbook" "Don't off all the hackers on the
    > planet unless your servers are deep in a salt mine and not connected to
    > the rest of the world and powered off and disassembeled. It doesn't
    > matter if you are 'right'"
    Understandable though it may be, there's nothing shrewd about this DOS
    attack - it's blemishing the (so far) unspoilt reputation of sensibility
    of the Open Source community. In Eric Raymond's words at
    [url]http://linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2003082400126NWCYLL:[/url]

    "With whatever authority I have, I ask that the DOS attack cease
    immediately. Please stand down now. We have better ways to win this fight.
    There are at least three reasons running a denial-of-service against SCO
    is a bad idea:
    First: We're the good guys. But that doesn't matter if we aren't seen to
    be the good guys. We cannot fight our war using vandalism and trespass and
    the suppression of speech, or SCO will paint us as crackers and maybe win.
    Let's keep the moral high ground here. Second: We have other tools that
    are more powerful. We have an astonishingly strong set of facts on our
    side. SCO has been caught in multiple lies, wholesale IP violations, and
    defamatory statements. The way to destroy them is with legal weapons. We
    can do that. Third: SCO is its own worst enemy. Every time its
    spokespeople open their mouths, they dig their company's grave a little
    deeper. Consider their statements at SCOforum and what followed. We're in
    an even stronger position than we were three days ago."

    In other words: give 'em enough rope to hang themselves. As recent events
    suggest, SCO is perfectly capable of orchestrating it's own well-deserved
    demise. The more utter bogus they launch into the world, the faster this
    realm of greed, slander and paranoia can be burnt to the ground, ploughed
    over and forever buried - by legal means that is. This DOS attack is
    probably the best thing that could happen to them now, so it's vital that
    it stops as soon as possible.

    Richard Rasker

    --
    Linetec Translation and Technology Services

    [url]http://www.linetec.nl/[/url]

    Richard Rasker Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: sco.com and caldera.com are down

    On Sun, Aug 24, 2003, Brian K. White wrote:
    .....
    >It must say somewhere in the very early chapters of the "IT Industry
    >Organization Operators Handbook" "Don't off all the hackers on the
    >planet unless your servers are deep in a salt mine and not connected to
    >the rest of the world and powered off and disassembeled. It doesn't matter
    >if you are 'right'"
    This relates to the adage relating to getting into ing contests with
    newspapers. It doesn't pay when your opponent buys ink by the barrel.

    The SCO management actions are more akin to going into a battle of wits
    unarmed. McBride's latest rants on IBM's financing the opposition sound
    like a ``B'' movie villain.

    Bill
    --
    INTERNET: [email]billCelestial.COM[/email] Bill Campbell; Celestial Systems, Inc.
    UUCP: camco!bill PO Box 820; 6641 E. Mercer Way
    FAX: (206) 232-9186 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820; (206) 236-1676
    URL: [url]http://www.celestial.com/[/url]

    Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn't mean politics
    won'ttake an interest in you. -- Pericles
    Bill Campbell Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: sco.com and caldera.com are down


    "Jeff Liebermann" <jefflcomix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote in message
    news:stohkvojkohm63cs1s8nei75pddh3r7ejn4ax.com...
    >
    > [...] Personally, I don't agree with either SCO's
    > actions or logic. There are many good people still employed by SCO
    > and I suspect many are stuck with my dilemma. How can I defend a
    > company without also defending its stupid management actions? I don't
    > have an answer. I've kept my big mouth shut in newsgroups and mailing
    > lists because any defense of SCO would probably be viewed as a defense
    > of SCO's point of view. [...]
    >
    That's rather my position.
    I shudder at the thought that I may have to start shipping new systems on
    linux.

    Linux is great. Linux is fun. Linux is not an OS I want to have to support
    in the context where I install osr5. I need to be able to install it, and
    walk away from it and come back 3 years later when the customers hardware
    gives out or they move or something, and I need my co-workers to be able
    to do basic support for all the customers stretching over the years the
    company has been in business and installing servers with our app on it.
    Every time I turn around there is some new hack that gets any exposed box
    rootkitted and every few months it changes so much there is no hope of
    developing a common set of knowledge that allows a person to support boxes
    of various ages stretching over several years. I *like* that not very much
    has changed between 5.0.4 and 5.0.7. and what has changed has mostly not
    broken backwards compatibility with any install-scripts or basic sysadmin
    knowledge. If you knew how to restart the print spooler on Xenix, you
    still do on 5.0.7. That is valueable. That is EXTREMELY valuable. The
    linux kiddies and other short-sighted people don't understand that, but I
    do and my customers are better off for it. Sure, I personally can handle
    the changes in linux and actually could support a spectrum of boxes of
    different ages, but I'm the only one in my company who could because it is
    my pleasure to keep up with stuff like that and supporting the OS's is my
    special focus. With sco *everyone* but the receptionist in the company
    could do at least basic support. They learned some basic commands verbatim
    years ago, and they still apply. They read commands out of a "tricks"
    database that were put in years ago, and they still apply. For linux that
    database would have to have pages of "or it might be like this, or it
    might be like that, or if this file exists then you do it this other
    way..." for every damned item. Either that or the whole thing get chucked
    and replaced with one answer "get brian"

    That would be good for all those linux-knowledgeable people out there who
    could get nice jobs as consultants and support staff, but it would NOT be
    good for customers who never needed that before. Moving to Linux in
    certain environments is a Huge Advance Backwards.

    --
    Brian K. White -- [email]brianaljex.com[/email] -- [url]http://www.aljex.com/bkw/[/url]
    +++++[>+++[>+++++>+++++++<<-]<-]>>+.>.+++++.+++++++.-.[>+<---]>++.
    filePro BBx Linux SCO Prosper/FACTS AutoCAD #callahans Satriani

    Brian K. White Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: sco.com and caldera.com are down

    On Sun, Aug 24, 2003, Brian K. White wrote:
    >
    >"Jeff Liebermann" <jefflcomix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote in message
    >news:stohkvojkohm63cs1s8nei75pddh3r7ejn4ax.com.. .
    >>
    >> [...] Personally, I don't agree with either SCO's
    >> actions or logic. There are many good people still employed by SCO
    >> and I suspect many are stuck with my dilemma. How can I defend a
    >> company without also defending its stupid management actions? I don't
    >> have an answer. I've kept my big mouth shut in newsgroups and mailing
    >> lists because any defense of SCO would probably be viewed as a defense
    >> of SCO's point of view. [...]
    >>
    >
    >That's rather my position.
    >I shudder at the thought that I may have to start shipping new systems on
    >linux.
    >
    >Linux is great. Linux is fun. Linux is not an OS I want to have to support
    >in the context where I install osr5. I need to be able to install it, and
    >walk away from it and come back 3 years later when the customers hardware
    >gives out or they move or something, and I need my co-workers to be able
    >to do basic support for all the customers stretching over the years the
    >company has been in business and installing servers with our app on it.
    Funny, I've been doing that on Linux for years now. Our first mission-
    critical Linux install was in September 1997. That machine ran six months
    before its first reboot when a janitor knocked the power cord out. We've
    had Linux running here, and at ISPs for years without their being cracked
    or requiring constant maintenance. Linux uptimes, even at busy ISPs, is
    generally a function of power outages or equipment moves, not software
    problems.

    Of course we don't install any Linux system without first going through it
    to tighten security and replace vulnerable programs like sendmail and BIND
    with secure alternatives. We do the same thing on OSR5, but it takes a lot
    more effort there than on Linux or FreeBSD. I don't trust any vendor's
    system out of the box, and have found major security holes in Solaris, OSR
    5 (FCS with 777 permissions on ``/'' and all the ``/opt'' directories),
    Linux, etc. The SuSE 8.[12] releases come with most services turned off by
    default, and others listening only on the 127.0.0.1 localhost interface
    (e.g. postfix) which minimizes the dangers even on default installations.

    I do agree that Linux developers have a nasty habit of not worrying about
    backwards compatibility, and have said so on many occassions. On the other
    hand, the time necessary to keep up to speed is far less that that
    necessary to keep up with the continual flood of Microsoft holes and
    patches.

    Bill
    --
    INTERNET: [email]billCelestial.COM[/email] Bill Campbell; Celestial Software LLC
    UUCP: camco!bill PO Box 820; 6641 E. Mercer Way
    FAX: (206) 232-9186 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820; (206) 236-1676
    URL: [url]http://www.celestial.com/[/url]

    ``Our Foreign dealings are an Open Book, generally a Check Book.''
    Will Rogers
    Bill Campbell Guest

  12. #12

    Default Re: sco.com and caldera.com are down

    On Sat, 23 Aug 2003, Nucleon wrote:
    > Since yesterday or before, I can no longer access either sco.com or
    > caldera.com.
    Well, [url]www.scosource.com[/url] is up!
    >
    >
    Whoever Guest

  13. #13

    Default Re: sco.com and caldera.com are down

    In article <pan.2003.08.24.18.31.20.925466mtco.com>,
    Nucleon <tcfelkermtco.com> wrote:
    >On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 05:05:17 +0000, Larry Rosenman wrote:
    >
    >> I just talked to the VIAWEST NOCC, and the SCO and CALDERA web/FTP sites
    >> are blackholed because some lovely miscreants are DDOS'ing them.
    >>
    >> When the attack stops, they'll lift the block at InterNAP.
    >>
    >> LER
    >
    >That's interesting, but can anyone confirm it? With some web searching, I
    >can only find info about the DDoS on May 2, which SCO was quick to blame
    >on Linux users. If there were another one, especially one that has
    >continued for at least two days, wouldn't we have heard about it in the
    >news?
    >
    >It's quiet. Too quiet.
    Read what I said. My post was after I talked to a gentleman (I didn't
    write his name down) in the ViaWest NOC.

    I don't have enough traffic at the ISP I work for to tell what's going on.

    The ViaWest folks have apparently put the lid on, as I tried to verify
    my post earlier today for someone, and couldn't get information.

    The traceroute I ran acts like an ACL or NULL ROUTE or combination
    of the two. (I'm a network engineer by trade, and the person that
    does these blocks for us).

    SO, the evidence is an ACL/NULL route for the /24 that the SCO/Caldera
    web/FTP sites live in. the reason can't be 100% verified because
    ViaWest can't say to a NON-Customer what's going on (standard policy).

    LER

    --
    Larry Rosenman [url]http://www.lerctr.org/~ler[/url]
    Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: [email]lerlerctr.org[/email]
    US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749
    Larry Rosenman Guest

  14. #14

    Default Re: sco.com and caldera.com are down

    Jeff Liebermann <jefflcomix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
    >So much for free speech. Personally, I don't agree with either SCO's
    >actions or logic. There are many good people still employed by SCO
    >and I suspect many are stuck with my dilemma. How can I defend a
    >company without also defending its stupid management actions? I don't
    >have an answer. I've kept my big mouth shut in newsgroups and mailing
    >lists because any defense of SCO would probably be viewed as a defense
    >of SCO's point of view. I probably shouldn't have scribbled this
    >message. However, I take a dim view of warped facts and thought some
    >comments might be useful.
    Your comments were worth writing.

    I haven't kept my big mouth shut and never will. In spite of
    being very careful to avoid it, most of the Linux dolts have
    seen me as defending SCO. That's so stupid that I can't say
    any more about it without getting angry and spouting nasties
    again.

    I have never had much respect for the larger Linux community. They
    have always seemed to me to be a bunch of yowling dogs, immature,
    filled with religious fervor for their OS, and exhibiting all
    the worst characteristics of a mob.

    This DOS attack just confirms all of that.

    --
    [email]tonyaplawrence.com[/email] Unix/Linux/Mac OS X resources: [url]http://aplawrence.com[/url]
    Get paid for writing about tech: [url]http://aplawrence.com/publish.html[/url]
    tony@aplawrence.com Guest

  15. #15

    Default Re: sco.com and caldera.com are down

    [email]tonyaplawrence.com[/email] wrote in news:bicu94$b73$3pcls4.std.com:
    > I have never had much respect for the larger Linux community. They
    > have always seemed to me to be a bunch of yowling dogs, immature,
    > filled with religious fervor for their OS, and exhibiting all
    > the worst characteristics of a mob.
    >
    > This DOS attack just confirms all of that.
    Which is painted the "larger Linux community" with that single broad brush.
    Nice.

    --
    fD

    fLameDogg Guest

  16. #16

    Default Re: sco-list: Re: ESR urges to cease DOS attack

    On Mon, Aug 25, 2003, [email]tonyaplawrence.com[/email] wrote:
    ....
    >
    >All you have to do is read slashdot for a week to know that the
    >intelligence and maturity level of the Linux community is incredibly low.
    >
    >Eric's words won't fall on deaf ears, but they will fall on dumb ones.
    Cute Tony. You're painting with a very broad brush there. The slashdot
    crowd is hardly ``the linux community''.

    Bill
    --
    INTERNET: [email]billCelestial.COM[/email] Bill Campbell; Celestial Software LLC
    UUCP: camco!bill PO Box 820; 6641 E. Mercer Way
    FAX: (206) 232-9186 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820; (206) 236-1676
    URL: [url]http://www.celestial.com/[/url]

    ``Never do your enemy a minor injury.''
    - Machiavelli

    Bill Campbell Guest

  17. #17

    Default Re: ESR urges to cease DOS attack

    [email]tonyaplawrence.com[/email] wrote:
    >
    > All you have to do is read slashdot for a week to know that the
    > intelligence and maturity level of the Linux community is incredibly low.
    >

    Syllogism:

    1) The intelligence and maturity level of the Linux community is
    incredibly low.

    2) Tony is a member of the Linux community.

    3) ... ;-)

    Frankly, I don't think you can reliably prove anything by reading
    Slashdot for a week. Except maybe how to turn your brain to mush.

    --
    Ian Wilson.

    Ian Wilson Guest

  18. #18

    Default Re: ESR urges to cease DOS attack

    <tonyaplawrence.com> wrote in message news:bictkd$b73$2pcls4.std.com...
    > All you have to do is read slashdot for a week to know that the
    > intelligence and maturity level of the Linux community is incredibly low.
    I somehow differ in that opinion, as /. can hardly be used as a reference
    for determining demographics within the Linux community.

    Newsgroup postings would be far more accurate in that determination.

    Though, I have lost all interest in /. some time back because of the
    cretins.
    > Eric's words won't fall on deaf ears, but they will fall on dumb ones.
    That assumes /dev/ears is even simlinks to /dev/head/leftear and
    /dev/head/righteear which from past experience has shown to be linked to
    /dev/wall/brick


    Wayne M Jackson Guest

  19. #19

    Default Re: ESR urges to cease DOS attack


    "Ian Wilson" <scobloke2infotop.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:bidovm$3e4$1hercules.btinternet.com...
    > [email]tonyaplawrence.com[/email] wrote:
    > >
    > > All you have to do is read slashdot for a week to know that the
    > > intelligence and maturity level of the Linux community is incredibly
    low.
    > >
    >
    >
    > Syllogism:
    >
    > 1) The intelligence and maturity level of the Linux community is
    > incredibly low.
    .... some of the most intelligent people I know are of the Linux community
    .... It's the script-kiddies who have little or no intelligence/maturity,
    wanting only to cause pain/disruption to those around them.
    > 2) Tony is a member of the Linux community.
    As are most of us. :P
    > 3) ... ;-)
    >
    > Frankly, I don't think you can reliably prove anything by reading
    > Slashdot for a week. Except maybe how to turn your brain to mush.
    Now this is a comment I can agree with!

    Reading SlashDot for a day is enough to make you feel 'dumber'. The amount
    of ego flowing through that site is astronomical.

    bkx


    Stuart J. Browne Guest

  20. #20

    Default Re: sco.com and caldera.com are down

    fLameDogg <flamedoggoperamail.com> wrote:
    >tonyaplawrence.com wrote in news:bicu94$b73$3pcls4.std.com:
    >> I have never had much respect for the larger Linux community. They
    >> have always seemed to me to be a bunch of yowling dogs, immature,
    >> filled with religious fervor for their OS, and exhibiting all
    >> the worst characteristics of a mob.
    >>
    >> This DOS attack just confirms all of that.
    >Which is painted the "larger Linux community" with that single broad brush.
    >Nice.

    My apologies to the "broader Linux community" that has been spouting
    nastygrams about SCO long before there was any indication that the
    barbs were deserved.

    I will say now that it sure looks like SCO DOES deserve the censure,
    but none of them knew that until just recently. Yet many howled
    for boycotts etc. in spite of not having any idea whether or not the
    claims were legit.

    OK, as I said, it sure looks like they are not legit. But being
    right for the wrong reason doesn't make me respect 'em any more.

    Interesting that I haven't seen a peep in Slashdot about this..

    --
    [email]tonyaplawrence.com[/email] Unix/Linux/Mac OS X resources: [url]http://aplawrence.com[/url]
    Get paid for writing about tech: [url]http://aplawrence.com/publish.html[/url]
    tony@aplawrence.com Guest

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139