* OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 18:02 ` Virii on vger.kernel.org lists Riley Williams
@ 2001-07-31 18:12 ` Craig Milo Rogers
2001-07-31 19:12 ` William Scott Lockwood III
` (4 more replies)
2001-07-31 19:01 ` Kent Borg
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 5 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Craig Milo Rogers @ 2001-07-31 18:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Riley Williams; +Cc: Matti Aarnio, christophe barbé, Linux Kernel
>Is there any way we can set up an automatic virus scan of all
>attachments at vger, and have it deal with any virii at source?
Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments,
or bounce the messages containing them. End of story.
Craig Milo Rogers
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread* Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 18:12 ` OT: " Craig Milo Rogers
@ 2001-07-31 19:12 ` William Scott Lockwood III
2001-07-31 21:30 ` OT: " Paul G. Allen
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: William Scott Lockwood III @ 2001-07-31 19:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Riley Williams, Craig Milo Rogers
Cc: Matti Aarnio, christophe barbé , Linux Kernel
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 988 bytes --]
Strip rather than bounce. Some of us know how to configure our mail
clients to send messages in plain text...
Scott
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig Milo Rogers" <rogers@ISI.EDU>
To: "Riley Williams" <rhw@MemAlpha.CX>
Cc: "Matti Aarnio" <matti.aarnio@zmailer.org>; "christophe barbé"
<christophe.barbe@lineo.fr>; "Linux Kernel"
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 1:12 PM
Subject: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
| >Is there any way we can set up an automatic virus scan of all
| >attachments at vger, and have it deal with any virii at source?
|
| Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments,
| or bounce the messages containing them. End of story.
|
| Craig Milo Rogers
| -
| To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
linux-kernel" in
| the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
| More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
| Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread* Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 18:12 ` OT: " Craig Milo Rogers
2001-07-31 19:12 ` William Scott Lockwood III
@ 2001-07-31 21:30 ` Paul G. Allen
2001-07-31 22:17 ` Riley Williams
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Paul G. Allen @ 2001-07-31 21:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: Linux Kernel
Craig Milo Rogers wrote:
>
> >Is there any way we can set up an automatic virus scan of all
> >attachments at vger, and have it deal with any virii at source?
>
> Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments,
> or bounce the messages containing them. End of story.
>
This is exactly what is done with the KPLUG mailing lists (Kernel-Panic Linux User Group - www.kernel-panic.org). Attachments are not allowed by the mail server
and anyone sending HTML/RTF format mail gets an earful (eyeful?) from other list members.
Of course this would not stop Subseven propagation (generally, Subseven is attached to a web site and an e-mail is sent to you with a link to that site.
Clicking on the link, loading the site, infects your Windows box), but then this is a case where simple education is the way to stop propagation.
PGA
--
Paul G. Allen
UNIX Admin II/Programmer
Akamai Technologies, Inc.
www.akamai.com
Work: (858)909-3630
Cell: (858)395-5043
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread* Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 18:12 ` OT: " Craig Milo Rogers
2001-07-31 19:12 ` William Scott Lockwood III
2001-07-31 21:30 ` OT: " Paul G. Allen
@ 2001-07-31 22:17 ` Riley Williams
2001-07-31 22:31 ` Thomas Duffy
` (2 more replies)
2001-08-01 21:07 ` Dr. Kelsey Hudson
2001-08-07 15:07 ` Dick Streefland
4 siblings, 3 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Riley Williams @ 2001-07-31 22:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Craig Milo Rogers; +Cc: Matti Aarnio, Linux Kernel
Hi Craig.
>> Is there any way we can set up an automatic virus scan of all
>> attachments at vger, and have it deal with any virii at source?
> Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments, or
> bounce the messages containing them. End of story.
Two problems with that:
1. Some virii are text attachments. Your fix doesn't deal wioth them.
2. The maintainer of the XXX driver just uploaded a large patch that
fixes a major bug in their driver to the mailing list, and zip'd
it up to reduce its size. You just bounced it...
Basically, that particular fix causes pain and gives no gain, so as
far as I'm concerned, it's a non-starter...
Best wishes from Riley.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread* Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 22:17 ` Riley Williams
@ 2001-07-31 22:31 ` Thomas Duffy
2001-07-31 22:33 ` Craig Milo Rogers
2001-07-31 22:47 ` Alan Shutko
2 siblings, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Duffy @ 2001-07-31 22:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Riley Williams; +Cc: Craig Milo Rogers, Matti Aarnio, Linux Kernel
On 31 Jul 2001 23:17:13 +0100, Riley Williams wrote:
> 1. Some virii are text attachments. Your fix doesn't deal wioth them.
huh? how do you write an ASCII text virus. if you can do that, I will
give you a cookie.
example, maybe:
email receiver, please forward this message to everyone you know and
then execute as root "rm -rf /"
(if you refer to vbs text attachments, then that is a different story)
> 2. The maintainer of the XXX driver just uploaded a large patch that
> fixes a major bug in their driver to the mailing list, and zip'd
> it up to reduce its size. You just bounced it...
said driver writer should not be uploading huge patches to the mailing
list anyways and instead should have a URL that points to the website or
ftp site with the patch on it. if it is zipped already, then sending in
email defeats the purpose since I cannot view it in my email reader to
see if it makes sense. I have to be proactive about viewing it, so it
might as well be on a website or ftp site.
-tduffy
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 22:17 ` Riley Williams
2001-07-31 22:31 ` Thomas Duffy
@ 2001-07-31 22:33 ` Craig Milo Rogers
2001-07-31 23:06 ` Riley Williams
2001-08-02 15:27 ` Alan Cox
2001-07-31 22:47 ` Alan Shutko
2 siblings, 2 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Craig Milo Rogers @ 2001-07-31 22:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Riley Williams; +Cc: Matti Aarnio, Linux Kernel
> > Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments, or
> > bounce the messages containing them. End of story.
>
>Two problems with that:
>
> 1. Some virii are text attachments. Your fix doesn't deal wioth them.
I'm not aware of the TEXT/PLAIN viruses (ignoring jokes, er,
social comments, about the GPL). Could you point me to a sample?
> 2. The maintainer of the XXX driver just uploaded a large patch that
> fixes a major bug in their driver to the mailing list, and zip'd
> it up to reduce its size. You just bounced it...
I recall from past discussions that there's considerable
sentiment on l-k that zip'd patches are undesirable. If the patch is
inconveniently large, it can be split into several messages, or placed
on an FTP server. Inconvenient for the developer, maybe, but better
for the list as a whole.
Separately, I think we've spent enough time with the off-topic
topic. Perhaps we can move the discussion offline?
Craig Milo Rogers
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 22:33 ` Craig Milo Rogers
@ 2001-07-31 23:06 ` Riley Williams
2001-08-02 15:27 ` Alan Cox
1 sibling, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Riley Williams @ 2001-07-31 23:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Craig Milo Rogers; +Cc: Matti Aarnio, Linux Kernel
Hi Craig.
>>> Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments, or
>>> bounce the messages containing them. End of story.
>> Two problems with that:
>>
>> 1. Some virii are text attachments. Your fix doesn't deal with them.
> I'm not aware of the TEXT/PLAIN viruses (ignoring jokes, er,
> social comments, about the GPL). Could you point me to a sample?
Are you limiting "text attachments" to TEXT/PLAIN ??? If so, you just
killed a large number of very useful attachments. Off the top of my
head...
1. Most patches that are attached rather than inline arrive here
as TEXT/DIFF so you've just killed a lot of very important
attachments.
2. Some of Linus Torvalds' emails come with a TEXT/SIGNATURE
attachment, so you've just prevented him posting from the
computer that does that.
3. One of the assignments at University was to email a specific
MS-Word document (with an auto-starting macro in it) through a
mailer that was specifically set to strip any attachments of the
relevant mime types. In a class of 43 students, only two failed
that assignment, and between the 41 who succeeded, no less than
SEVEN different ways to do so were used, ALL of which used TEXT/
mime types for the enclosure - and FIVE of those were new to the
lecturer as well. The said lecturer also stated that there were
a further NINE ways to do so that none of us had found, but did
not go into detail.
Once you allow TEXT/* to pass, you discover just how many virii will
get straight past your filter without any problems at all. Basically,
you get nowhere doing that...
>> 2. The maintainer of the XXX driver just uploaded a large patch that
>> fixes a major bug in their driver to the mailing list, and zip'd
>> it up to reduce its size. You just bounced it...
> I recall from past discussions that there's considerable
> sentiment on l-k that zip'd patches are undesirable. If the
> patch is inconveniently large, it can be split into several
> messages, or placed on an FTP server. Inconvenient for the
> developer, maybe, but better for the list as a whole.
Personally, my own stance on attachments (zip or otherwise) is that
they should be below the limit at which my mailhost rejects them. On
at least one mailhost I know, emails over 25k are killed without
notice. My own mailhost kills any over 1,536k so that isn't a problem
for me, but others have much smaller limits.
> Separately, I think we've spent enough time with the off-topic
> topic. Perhaps we can move the discussion offline?
Other than your comments, it already is offline...
Best wishes from Riley.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread* Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 22:33 ` Craig Milo Rogers
2001-07-31 23:06 ` Riley Williams
@ 2001-08-02 15:27 ` Alan Cox
1 sibling, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2001-08-02 15:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Craig Milo Rogers; +Cc: Riley Williams, Matti Aarnio, Linux Kernel
> >Two problems with that:
> > 1. Some virii are text attachments. Your fix doesn't deal wioth them.
>
> I'm not aware of the TEXT/PLAIN viruses (ignoring jokes, er,
> social comments, about the GPL). Could you point me to a sample?
Mime header based ones: there have been several
Body text based ones: I know of one that exploited the escape vulnerability
in X11R5 xterm - it really was a 'README' virus.
Alan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 22:17 ` Riley Williams
2001-07-31 22:31 ` Thomas Duffy
2001-07-31 22:33 ` Craig Milo Rogers
@ 2001-07-31 22:47 ` Alan Shutko
2 siblings, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Alan Shutko @ 2001-07-31 22:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Duffy
Cc: Riley Williams, Craig Milo Rogers, Matti Aarnio, Linux Kernel
Thomas Duffy <Thomas.Duffy.99@alumni.brown.edu> writes:
> On 31 Jul 2001 23:17:13 +0100, Riley Williams wrote:
>
>> 1. Some virii are text attachments. Your fix doesn't deal wioth them.
>
> huh? how do you write an ASCII text virus. if you can do that, I will
> give you a cookie.
Easy... since most Windows mailers ignore the mime-type, just throw
your normal virus in a text/plain type.
--
Alan Shutko <ats@acm.org> - In a variety of flavors!
If anything can go wrong, it will.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 18:12 ` OT: " Craig Milo Rogers
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2001-07-31 22:17 ` Riley Williams
@ 2001-08-01 21:07 ` Dr. Kelsey Hudson
2001-08-01 21:15 ` Alexander Viro
` (2 more replies)
2001-08-07 15:07 ` Dick Streefland
4 siblings, 3 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Dr. Kelsey Hudson @ 2001-08-01 21:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Craig Milo Rogers; +Cc: Linux Kernel
On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Craig Milo Rogers wrote:
> Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments,
> or bounce the messages containing them. End of story.
That has the rather stupid effect of also killing gzip/bzip2ed patches
that come to the list. Survey says: BZZZZZT!
Kelsey Hudson khudson@ctica.com
Software Engineer
Compendium Technologies, Inc (619) 725-0771
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread* Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-08-01 21:07 ` Dr. Kelsey Hudson
@ 2001-08-01 21:15 ` Alexander Viro
2001-08-01 21:57 ` J . A . Magallon
2001-08-02 0:27 ` Alan Cox
2001-08-01 21:20 ` Justin Guyett
2001-08-02 1:57 ` Paul G. Allen
2 siblings, 2 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Alexander Viro @ 2001-08-01 21:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dr. Kelsey Hudson; +Cc: Craig Milo Rogers, Linux Kernel
On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Dr. Kelsey Hudson wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Craig Milo Rogers wrote:
>
> > Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments,
> > or bounce the messages containing them. End of story.
>
> That has the rather stupid effect of also killing gzip/bzip2ed patches
> that come to the list. Survey says: BZZZZZT!
Don't use attachments on l-k. If patch is small - include it in the body.
If it isn't - post URL.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-08-01 21:15 ` Alexander Viro
@ 2001-08-01 21:57 ` J . A . Magallon
2001-08-02 5:38 ` Paul G. Allen
` (2 more replies)
2001-08-02 0:27 ` Alan Cox
1 sibling, 3 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: J . A . Magallon @ 2001-08-01 21:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexander Viro; +Cc: Dr . Kelsey Hudson, Craig Milo Rogers, Linux Kernel
On 20010801 Alexander Viro wrote:
>
>
>On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Dr. Kelsey Hudson wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Craig Milo Rogers wrote:
>>
>> > Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments,
>> > or bounce the messages containing them. End of story.
>>
>> That has the rather stupid effect of also killing gzip/bzip2ed patches
>> that come to the list. Survey says: BZZZZZT!
>
>Don't use attachments on l-k. If patch is small - include it in the body.
>If it isn't - post URL.
>
That is the always repeated answer. I could get a web page at some box at the
University, but there are many people that have not a permanent address. Going
to the mess of using a ISP-provided web page is a pain. Instead of bzip your
patch and send it to the list you have to go through bizarre http interfaces
to manage your web page (tell me about a ISP that lets you telnet/ssh/ftp to your
account).
I do not see why a bzipped patch is so bad. The only person I was aware he won't
read anything but plain text is Linus (and now some on this thread look with
the same feeling).
--
J.A. Magallon # Let the source be with you...
mailto:jamagallon@able.es
Mandrake Linux release 8.1 (Cooker) for i586
Linux werewolf 2.4.7-ac3 #1 SMP Mon Jul 30 16:39:36 CEST 2001 i686
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread* Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-08-01 21:57 ` J . A . Magallon
@ 2001-08-02 5:38 ` Paul G. Allen
2001-08-02 5:44 ` Miles Lane
2001-08-02 13:49 ` john slee
2 siblings, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Paul G. Allen @ 2001-08-02 5:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linux Kernel
"J . A . Magallon" wrote:
>
[SNIP]
>
> That is the always repeated answer. I could get a web page at some box at the
> University, but there are many people that have not a permanent address. Going
> to the mess of using a ISP-provided web page is a pain. Instead of bzip your
> patch and send it to the list you have to go through bizarre http interfaces
> to manage your web page (tell me about a ISP that lets you telnet/ssh/ftp to your
> account).
>
> I do not see why a bzipped patch is so bad. The only person I was aware he won't
> read anything but plain text is Linus (and now some on this thread look with
> the same feeling).
>
There are a few reasons why zipped attachments, large attachments, and
even large text-only patches are bad on a mailing list such as this:
1. Not everyone uses a mail client that will support the various
attachment encodings and therefore can not get the attachment without
jumping through hoops. Why subject them to this?
2. Some mail clients pervert the standard attachment formats, such as
Outlook Express, making them undecipherable by anyone using anything
other than that very same client. Again, why subject people to that?
3. Many, many people PAY PER BYTE for their Internet connection. Adding
a large attachment, or sending a large text patch file, costs them
money. Many times they do not want it anyway and you are costing them
money by forcing them to D/L it.
4. Not everyone has a high speed connection and with the volume that a
list like this creates, it is a LARGE burden on them to wait, and wait,
and wait, for the few messages they want, and/or need, to see.
So, as with other large projects I've worked on (though none quite this
large) involving a mailing list, the best solution is to a) strip
attachments atthe mailing list server and b) provide a repository for
people to D/L patches, new kernels, etc. for public access.
PGA
--
Paul G. Allen
UNIX Admin II/Network Security
Akamai Technologies, Inc.
www.akamai.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-08-01 21:57 ` J . A . Magallon
2001-08-02 5:38 ` Paul G. Allen
@ 2001-08-02 5:44 ` Miles Lane
2001-08-02 13:49 ` john slee
2 siblings, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Miles Lane @ 2001-08-02 5:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paul G. Allen; +Cc: Linux Kernel
On 01 Aug 2001 22:38:19 -0700, Paul G. Allen wrote:
> "J . A . Magallon" wrote:
> >
>
> [SNIP]
> >
> > That is the always repeated answer. I could get a web page at some box at the
> > University, but there are many people that have not a permanent address. Going
> > to the mess of using a ISP-provided web page is a pain. Instead of bzip your
> > patch and send it to the list you have to go through bizarre http interfaces
> > to manage your web page (tell me about a ISP that lets you telnet/ssh/ftp to your
> > account).
> >
> > I do not see why a bzipped patch is so bad. The only person I was aware he won't
> > read anything but plain text is Linus (and now some on this thread look with
> > the same feeling).
> >
>
> There are a few reasons why zipped attachments, large attachments, and
> even large text-only patches are bad on a mailing list such as this:
>
> 1. Not everyone uses a mail client that will support the various
> attachment encodings and therefore can not get the attachment without
> jumping through hoops. Why subject them to this?
<snip>
One interface that provides an easy mechanism for posting attachments
is Bugzilla. See http://bugzilla.gnome.org. If you open a bug report,
you can add file attachments after initially creating the bug.
Something similar might work very well for the LKML needs.
All that is really required is a web server, some Bugzilla-like
method of pointing to a file and having that get posted to the
web server. Then, a unique link to the posted file can be returned
that the user can then send along to LKML.
Miles
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-08-01 21:57 ` J . A . Magallon
2001-08-02 5:38 ` Paul G. Allen
2001-08-02 5:44 ` Miles Lane
@ 2001-08-02 13:49 ` john slee
2 siblings, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: john slee @ 2001-08-02 13:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: J . A . Magallon; +Cc: Linux Kernel
[cc list trimmed]
On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 11:57:24PM +0200, J . A . Magallon wrote:
> patch and send it to the list you have to go through bizarre http interfaces
i assume by "bizarre http interfaces" you mean webdav as used by modern
msie (on windows at least) and many many other applications? it's
hardly bizarre. http://www.webdav.org. people i've set it up for
(mostly mac users with the Goliath client) preferred it to ftp.
j.
--
"Bobby, jiggle Grandpa's rat so it looks alive, please" -- gary larson
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-08-01 21:15 ` Alexander Viro
2001-08-01 21:57 ` J . A . Magallon
@ 2001-08-02 0:27 ` Alan Cox
1 sibling, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2001-08-02 0:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexander Viro; +Cc: Dr. Kelsey Hudson, Craig Milo Rogers, Linux Kernel
> On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Dr. Kelsey Hudson wrote:
> > On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Craig Milo Rogers wrote:
> > > Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments,
> > > or bounce the messages containing them. End of story.
> >
> > That has the rather stupid effect of also killing gzip/bzip2ed patches
> > that come to the list. Survey says: BZZZZZT!
>
> Don't use attachments on l-k. If patch is small - include it in the body.
> If it isn't - post URL.
Nice theory but netscape, mozilla, and most versions of pine tend to make
a mess of patch files sent plain
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-08-01 21:07 ` Dr. Kelsey Hudson
2001-08-01 21:15 ` Alexander Viro
@ 2001-08-01 21:20 ` Justin Guyett
2001-08-02 1:57 ` Paul G. Allen
2 siblings, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Justin Guyett @ 2001-08-01 21:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dr. Kelsey Hudson; +Cc: Linux Kernel
On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Dr. Kelsey Hudson wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Craig Milo Rogers wrote:
> > Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments,
> > or bounce the messages containing them. End of story.
> That has the rather stupid effect of also killing gzip/bzip2ed patches
> that come to the list. Survey says: BZZZZZT!
and the response to that argument was that such patches are just as hard
or harder to turn into readable/usable form when included on the list as
when posted on an ftp/web site, so it's better to spare people's mailboxes
from huge attachments and just provide a url to the patch.
justin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-08-01 21:07 ` Dr. Kelsey Hudson
2001-08-01 21:15 ` Alexander Viro
2001-08-01 21:20 ` Justin Guyett
@ 2001-08-02 1:57 ` Paul G. Allen
2 siblings, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Paul G. Allen @ 2001-08-02 1:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
"Dr. Kelsey Hudson" wrote:
>
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Craig Milo Rogers wrote:
>
> > Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments,
> > or bounce the messages containing them. End of story.
>
> That has the rather stupid effect of also killing gzip/bzip2ed patches
> that come to the list. Survey says: BZZZZZT!
>
IMHEO, they should be placed in a repository, not sent to the list. But then, who am I to say? :)
PGA
--
Paul G. Allen
UNIX Admin II/Programmer
Akamai Technologies, Inc.
www.akamai.com
Work: (858)909-3630
Cell: (858)395-5043
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 18:12 ` OT: " Craig Milo Rogers
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2001-08-01 21:07 ` Dr. Kelsey Hudson
@ 2001-08-07 15:07 ` Dick Streefland
4 siblings, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Dick Streefland @ 2001-08-07 15:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Craig Milo Rogers <rogers@ISI.EDU> wrote:
| Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments,
| or bounce the messages containing them. End of story.
.... and don't forget to check for lines starting with "begin ":
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q265/2/30.ASP
--
Dick Streefland //// Altium BV
dick.streefland@altium.nl (@ @) http://www.altium.com
--------------------------------oOO--(_)--OOo---------------------------
.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 18:02 ` Virii on vger.kernel.org lists Riley Williams
2001-07-31 18:12 ` OT: " Craig Milo Rogers
@ 2001-07-31 19:01 ` Kent Borg
2001-07-31 19:18 ` William Scott Lockwood III
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Kent Borg @ 2001-07-31 19:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Riley Williams; +Cc: Matti Aarnio, christophe barbé, Linux Kernel
I always thought it was bad form to send any sort of
enclosure/attachment to a mailing list.
I guess in this MIME-era too many mail clients too easily send the
message itself as an attachment.
How much does this list need real attachments? Might the list server
strip out all attachments?--and if a message has only attachments,
maybe try to find the one that is the body, break out it, and re-send
it as a boring 822 body with none of the doo-dads likely to catch the
attention of Outlook and other clever mail clients.
If Outlook is too clever by half, sending only non-clever ASCII
content is tempting.
-kb, the Kent who has been lurking with mutt.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread* Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 18:02 ` Virii on vger.kernel.org lists Riley Williams
2001-07-31 18:12 ` OT: " Craig Milo Rogers
2001-07-31 19:01 ` Kent Borg
@ 2001-07-31 19:18 ` William Scott Lockwood III
2001-07-31 21:27 ` Ian Stirling
2001-07-31 22:41 ` Riley Williams
2001-07-31 22:00 ` Virii on vger.kernel.org lists Matti Aarnio
2001-08-01 10:49 ` Dominik Kubla
4 siblings, 2 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: William Scott Lockwood III @ 2001-07-31 19:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Riley Williams, Matti Aarnio; +Cc: christophe barbé , Linux Kernel
| > No. If you look carefully, you would be surprised at how many
| > are using OutlookSExpress to handle their email.
| > Of course in case of Viruses using OE security bugs, we all are
| > seeing the distilled evil.
Of course, non of the common "holes" in OE are left unfixed. People
should be responsible to update their mail clients. People using
Windows (like me) should also be responsible to maintain current virus
software themselves, rather than leaving that job to the mail server,
which seems like an unfair burden on the mail server to me. I
personally use McAfee, as it will auto update itself periodically if you
tell it to. Using OE as patched, and McAfee, Virii like the one that
just hit are not a problem - they are caught and killed before they can
execute... I got hit once (and if you search through the archives,
you'll find a message from me about it - one that I caught holy hell
from many of you for, but anyway) and learned from that incident to
secure my system. It has not happened since, and won't if I am careful.
The user has the responsibility to be careful, I think. Not the list
server.
| Is there any way we can set up an automatic virus scan of all
| attachments at vger, and have it deal with any virii at source?
Yes.
| Come to that, is there a decent Linux-based virus scanner around?
Yes.
| > It is analogous on how I am seeing the UNRELIABILITY of people's
| > email systems. I see only failure cases, never succesfull
| > deliveries!
| Same here...
No, you both miss the point. Some PEOPLE are ignorant or unreliable,
the email system performs exactly as instructed... No matter if it runs
on Linux, or *BSD, or Mickey$oft.
Regards,
Scott
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 19:18 ` William Scott Lockwood III
@ 2001-07-31 21:27 ` Ian Stirling
2001-07-31 21:50 ` William Scott Lockwood III
2001-07-31 22:49 ` Alan Olsen
2001-07-31 22:41 ` Riley Williams
1 sibling, 2 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Ian Stirling @ 2001-07-31 21:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
>
> | > No. If you look carefully, you would be surprised at how many
> | > are using OutlookSExpress to handle their email.
> | > Of course in case of Viruses using OE security bugs, we all are
> | > seeing the distilled evil.
> Of course, non of the common "holes" in OE are left unfixed. People
> should be responsible to update their mail clients. People using
> Windows (like me) should also be responsible to maintain current virus
> software themselves, rather than leaving that job to the mail server,
> which seems like an unfair burden on the mail server to me.
Not everyone has control of the system they can post from.
Some IS departments are poor at keeping systems secure, but still
won't let users touch them.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 21:27 ` Ian Stirling
@ 2001-07-31 21:50 ` William Scott Lockwood III
2001-07-31 22:49 ` Alan Olsen
1 sibling, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: William Scott Lockwood III @ 2001-07-31 21:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Stirling, linux-kernel
Totally irrelevant. As long as the other people those messages get sent
to have their act together, the problem dies there. If not, then the
morons responsible for maintaining the clients and mailservers that will
still allow this to happen get taught a lesson, don't they?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian Stirling" <root@mauve.demon.co.uk>
To: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 4:27 PM
Subject: Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
| >
| > | > No. If you look carefully, you would be surprised at how many
| > | > are using OutlookSExpress to handle their email.
| > | > Of course in case of Viruses using OE security bugs, we all are
| > | > seeing the distilled evil.
|
| > Of course, non of the common "holes" in OE are left unfixed. People
| > should be responsible to update their mail clients. People using
| > Windows (like me) should also be responsible to maintain current
virus
| > software themselves, rather than leaving that job to the mail
server,
| > which seems like an unfair burden on the mail server to me.
|
| Not everyone has control of the system they can post from.
| Some IS departments are poor at keeping systems secure, but still
| won't let users touch them.
|
| -
| To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
linux-kernel" in
| the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
| More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
| Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 21:27 ` Ian Stirling
2001-07-31 21:50 ` William Scott Lockwood III
@ 2001-07-31 22:49 ` Alan Olsen
1 sibling, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Alan Olsen @ 2001-07-31 22:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Stirling; +Cc: linux-kernel
On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Ian Stirling wrote:
> Not everyone has control of the system they can post from.
> Some IS departments are poor at keeping systems secure, but still
> won't let users touch them.
Or have been told by management that they are required to use buggy e-mail
clients because "it is company policy".
They tried to get me to use Exchange at the last company I worked for. I
laughed and then moved all my mail to the Linux box under my desk. I was
one of the few people in the company that had a stable mail account.
alan@ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply
Alan Olsen | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys.
"All power is derived from the barrel of a gnu." - Mao Tse Stallman
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 19:18 ` William Scott Lockwood III
2001-07-31 21:27 ` Ian Stirling
@ 2001-07-31 22:41 ` Riley Williams
2001-07-31 22:54 ` [OT] " William Scott Lockwood III
1 sibling, 1 reply; 90+ messages in thread
From: Riley Williams @ 2001-07-31 22:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: William Scott Lockwood III; +Cc: Matti Aarnio, Linux Kernel
Hi William.
> Of course, non of the common "holes" in OE are left unfixed.
> People should be responsible to update their mail clients.
> People using Windows (like me) should also be responsible to
> maintain current virus software themselves, rather than leaving
> that job to the mail server, which seems like an unfair burden
> on the mail server to me.
Depends how you view it - I'd much rather host my mailing lists on a
server that I knew scans for virii and deals with any it finds than
one that doesn't.
> I personally use McAfee, as it will auto update itself
> periodically if you tell it to. Using OE as patched, and McAfee,
> Virii like the one that just hit are not a problem - they are
> caught and killed before they can execute...
McAfee isn't a guarantee, no more than any other virii scanner is. I
used to use McAfee, and had it in auto-update mode. I still got hit by
FOURTEEN virii within half an hour of it updating itself!
> I got hit once (and if you search through the archives, you'll
> find a message from me about it - one that I caught holy hell
> from many of you for, but anyway) and learned from that incident
> to secure my system. It has not happened since, and won't if I
> am careful.
Even if you're careful, you can still get hit, so don't rest on your
laurels...
> The user has the responsibility to be careful, I think. Not the
> list server.
My own viewpoint is somewhat less blase than yours - the more virii
scanners between the originator and me, the lower the likelihood of my
systems getting a virii.
>> Is there any way we can set up an automatic virus scan of all
>> attachments at vger, and have it deal with any virii at source?
> Yes.
>> Come to that, is there a decent Linux-based virus scanner around?
> Yes.
Perhaps you'd care to give details, since you're so blase about it...
>>> It is analogous on how I am seeing the UNRELIABILITY of people's
>>> email systems. I see only failure cases, never succesfull
>>> deliveries!
>> Same here...
> No, you both miss the point.
Oh?
> Some PEOPLE are ignorant or unreliable...
Whether people are ignorant or unreliable has about as much to do with
whether their computers can catch virii as with whether they can. The
only people likely to claim otherwise are virii writers, IMHO.
> The email system performs exactly as instructed, no matter if it
> runs on Linux, or *BSD, or Mickey$oft.
The basic point of this duscussion is that the email system's
instructions are flawed and need changing.
Best wishes from Riley.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* [OT] Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 22:41 ` Riley Williams
@ 2001-07-31 22:54 ` William Scott Lockwood III
2001-07-31 23:19 ` Riley Williams
0 siblings, 1 reply; 90+ messages in thread
From: William Scott Lockwood III @ 2001-07-31 22:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Riley Williams; +Cc: Linux Kernel
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3940 bytes --]
Hello Riley!
As I said in another post on the list,
"http://www.mcafeeb2b.com/naicommon/buy-try/try/products-evals.asp
Go there, select your language and LINUX, and you will get a survey to
fill out that then lets you test drive their stuff for linux."
I don't feel that I am particularly blasé, but I will concede that you
have several good points. My main point was that people seem to be more
interested in the server doing the scanning for them rather than taking
responsibility for their own (lack of) security. Your view point is
just as valid.
And I don't think your experience with McAfee as reported is typical at
all. If it was, I'd still be having problems, and NAI would be out of
business. How long ago was this? What version of the product? What
OS? How did you update? What 14 Virii were you hit with? Did you
contact McAfee for support? I'd be very interested to get more details
about this.
Regards,
Scott
----- Original Message -----
From: "Riley Williams" <rhw@MemAlpha.CX>
To: "William Scott Lockwood III" <thatlinuxguy@hotmail.com>
Cc: "Matti Aarnio" <matti.aarnio@zmailer.org>; "Linux Kernel"
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 5:41 PM
Subject: Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
| Hi William.
|
| > Of course, non of the common "holes" in OE are left unfixed.
| > People should be responsible to update their mail clients.
| > People using Windows (like me) should also be responsible to
| > maintain current virus software themselves, rather than leaving
| > that job to the mail server, which seems like an unfair burden
| > on the mail server to me.
|
| Depends how you view it - I'd much rather host my mailing lists on a
| server that I knew scans for virii and deals with any it finds than
| one that doesn't.
|
| > I personally use McAfee, as it will auto update itself
| > periodically if you tell it to. Using OE as patched, and McAfee,
| > Virii like the one that just hit are not a problem - they are
| > caught and killed before they can execute...
|
| McAfee isn't a guarantee, no more than any other virii scanner is. I
| used to use McAfee, and had it in auto-update mode. I still got hit by
| FOURTEEN virii within half an hour of it updating itself!
|
| > I got hit once (and if you search through the archives, you'll
| > find a message from me about it - one that I caught holy hell
| > from many of you for, but anyway) and learned from that incident
| > to secure my system. It has not happened since, and won't if I
| > am careful.
|
| Even if you're careful, you can still get hit, so don't rest on your
| laurels...
|
| > The user has the responsibility to be careful, I think. Not the
| > list server.
|
| My own viewpoint is somewhat less blase than yours - the more virii
| scanners between the originator and me, the lower the likelihood of my
| systems getting a virii.
|
| >> Is there any way we can set up an automatic virus scan of all
| >> attachments at vger, and have it deal with any virii at source?
|
| > Yes.
|
| >> Come to that, is there a decent Linux-based virus scanner around?
|
| > Yes.
|
| Perhaps you'd care to give details, since you're so blase about it...
|
| >>> It is analogous on how I am seeing the UNRELIABILITY of people's
| >>> email systems. I see only failure cases, never succesfull
| >>> deliveries!
|
| >> Same here...
|
| > No, you both miss the point.
|
| Oh?
|
| > Some PEOPLE are ignorant or unreliable...
|
| Whether people are ignorant or unreliable has about as much to do with
| whether their computers can catch virii as with whether they can. The
| only people likely to claim otherwise are virii writers, IMHO.
|
| > The email system performs exactly as instructed, no matter if it
| > runs on Linux, or *BSD, or Mickey$oft.
|
| The basic point of this duscussion is that the email system's
| instructions are flawed and need changing.
|
| Best wishes from Riley.
|
|
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: [OT] Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 22:54 ` [OT] " William Scott Lockwood III
@ 2001-07-31 23:19 ` Riley Williams
2001-07-31 23:31 ` William Scott Lockwood III
2001-07-31 23:51 ` [OT] Virii (sic) Guest section DW
0 siblings, 2 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Riley Williams @ 2001-07-31 23:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: William Scott Lockwood III; +Cc: Linux Kernel
Hi William.
> As I said in another post on the list,
> "http://www.mcafeeb2b.com/naicommon/buy-try/try/products-evals.asp
> Go there, select your language and LINUX, and you will get a
> survey to fill out that then lets you test drive their stuff for
> linux."
I've not seen that post yet, so must apologise for missing it...
> I don't feel that I am particularly blasé, but I will concede
> that you have several good points. My main point was that people
> seem to be more interested in the server doing the scanning for
> them rather than taking responsibility for their own (lack of)
> security. Your view point is just as valid.
I've met people like that, and earn quite a reasonable living from
securing systems for computer novices. In my case, most of my
customers are elderly people who're interested in tracing their
ancestry and have been persuaded by the local computer mart that they
need a computer to do so, and nothing less than the latest all-singing
all-dancing system will do the job - and oh, Internet connectivity isa
a must so you'd better sign up to our company ISP for which we get
£X commission for everybody we sign up. I'm sure you know the type I'm
talking about...
> And I don't think your experience with McAfee as reported is
> typical at all. If it was, I'd still be having problems, and NAI
> would be out of business. How long ago was this? What version of
> the product? What OS? How did you update? What 14 Virii were you
> hit with? Did you contact McAfee for support? I'd be very
> interested to get more details about this.
I contacted McAfee about this straight away. Their response was that
on average, there's a timelapse of 53 hours from a virii first
appearing to their having a signature for it, and as there are at
least 370 new virii produced each day, many with multiple strains, it
was quite possible for such as I reported to happen.
The timeframe was around October 1999, so was mixed in with the
intensive Y2K tracing that was going on then, and I don't have details
of the specific virii any more, so can't advise there...
Best wishes from Riley.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* [OT] Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 23:19 ` Riley Williams
@ 2001-07-31 23:31 ` William Scott Lockwood III
2001-07-31 23:30 ` Riley Williams
2001-07-31 23:51 ` [OT] Virii (sic) Guest section DW
1 sibling, 1 reply; 90+ messages in thread
From: William Scott Lockwood III @ 2001-07-31 23:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Riley Williams; +Cc: Linux Kernel
I hope it got out! Perhaps someone already started striping out mail
from OE/Hotmail. :-)
----- Original Message -----
| Hi William.
| I've not seen that post yet, so must apologise for missing it...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* [OT] Virii (sic)
2001-07-31 23:19 ` Riley Williams
2001-07-31 23:31 ` William Scott Lockwood III
@ 2001-07-31 23:51 ` Guest section DW
2001-08-01 4:03 ` PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7 Alan Olsen
2001-08-01 6:58 ` [OT] Virii (sic) Riley Williams
1 sibling, 2 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Guest section DW @ 2001-07-31 23:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Riley Williams; +Cc: Linux Kernel
On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 12:19:28AM +0100, Riley Williams wrote:
> on average, there's a timelapse of 53 hours from a virii first
For some reason, seeing "virii" is somewhat painful to my eye.
I know, people invent fantasy plurals, like Vaxen and Unices/Unixen,
but somehow this is worse, yes indeed, it is badder.
[The singular is virus. The plural in English is viruses.
In Latin there is no plural - it is even debatable whether
virus is a noun in Latin - in any case it is indeclinable.]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7
2001-07-31 23:51 ` [OT] Virii (sic) Guest section DW
@ 2001-08-01 4:03 ` Alan Olsen
2001-08-01 3:37 ` Keith Owens
2001-08-01 6:58 ` [OT] Virii (sic) Riley Williams
1 sibling, 1 reply; 90+ messages in thread
From: Alan Olsen @ 2001-08-01 4:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linux Kernel
Well, my plans to hack on a weird piece of hardware in order to
experiment with kernel hacking did not go as planned. Seems the device
works fine without any problems at all. (The device is the eFilm Reader-7
PCMCIA PCI card.) The only "hacking" needed was to remove two bits of
plastic that kept me from inserting one card.
But in getting this installed, I found something that does not seem
right...
The module that used to be called "ide_cs.o" is now called "ide-cs.o".
It this on purpose or have I found a bug?
The reason I am wondering is that it requires some serious search and
replace in /etc/pcmcia/config to correct the problem or renaming the
module by hand. Not much of a hassle for me, but others will find it very
confusing. (Especially since the rest of the card service modules seem to
use "_cs.o" instead of "-cs.o".)
alan@ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply
Alan Olsen | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys.
"All power is derived from the barrel of a gnu." - Mao Tse Stallman
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7
2001-08-01 4:03 ` PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7 Alan Olsen
@ 2001-08-01 3:37 ` Keith Owens
2001-08-01 5:42 ` Alan Olsen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 90+ messages in thread
From: Keith Owens @ 2001-08-01 3:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Olsen; +Cc: Linux Kernel
On Tue, 31 Jul 2001 21:03:45 -0700 (PDT),
Alan Olsen <alan@clueserver.org> wrote:
>The module that used to be called "ide_cs.o" is now called "ide-cs.o".
>It this on purpose or have I found a bug?
drivers/ide/Makefile was added to the kernel in 2.4.3-99pre on approx.
May 19, 2000. The module was called ide-cs.o then and has had that
name ever since. The inconsistency between the kernel and the pcmcia
package is annoying but changing the kernel name now would probably
cause more problems that it solved.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7
2001-08-01 3:37 ` Keith Owens
@ 2001-08-01 5:42 ` Alan Olsen
2001-08-02 14:18 ` Alan Cox
2001-08-16 0:04 ` Paul Mackerras
0 siblings, 2 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Alan Olsen @ 2001-08-01 5:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Keith Owens; +Cc: Linux Kernel
On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Keith Owens wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2001 21:03:45 -0700 (PDT),
> Alan Olsen <alan@clueserver.org> wrote:
> >The module that used to be called "ide_cs.o" is now called "ide-cs.o".
> >It this on purpose or have I found a bug?
>
> drivers/ide/Makefile was added to the kernel in 2.4.3-99pre on approx.
> May 19, 2000. The module was called ide-cs.o then and has had that
> name ever since. The inconsistency between the kernel and the pcmcia
> package is annoying but changing the kernel name now would probably
> cause more problems that it solved.
I found out about a minute or so *after* I sent that message that the
problem is documented in the pcmcia-cs README-2.4. (Though it was a
little less than clear.)
I am a little surprised that the whole thing worked at all, given the
changes I had to make...
I still have a puzzling problem though.
I have a removable ide drive that has always been a bit contankerous.
Under 2.2.x, it would error out the first time, but a "cardctl reset"
would make it work fine.
Now when i try to mount it, the cardmgr code complains about a timeout on
the socket and suggests increasing setup_delay. That does not help. It
just delays the real problem.
When I insert the card, I get a beep from the cardmgr program seeing the
card being inserted. Then the whole system refuses to respond to anything
on the keyboard. (I have not tested if the system is reachable by network
when that happens.)
The drive is powered up at that point. If I pull the pcmcia card out,
once the process times out, the system returns to usable again.
Ideas what is causing it? I am suspecting that I am getting some sort of
irq lockup. All the other pcmcia devices run fine. Just ide is giving me
the problem.
alan@ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply
Alan Olsen | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys.
"All power is derived from the barrel of a gnu." - Mao Tse Stallman
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7
2001-08-01 5:42 ` Alan Olsen
@ 2001-08-02 14:18 ` Alan Cox
2001-08-02 19:07 ` Alan Olsen
2001-08-16 0:04 ` Paul Mackerras
1 sibling, 1 reply; 90+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2001-08-02 14:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Olsen; +Cc: Keith Owens, Linux Kernel
> When I insert the card, I get a beep from the cardmgr program seeing the
> card being inserted. Then the whole system refuses to respond to anything
> on the keyboard. (I have not tested if the system is reachable by network
> when that happens.)
Gunther posted this patch ages ago which seems to solve the problem
--- linux245.orig/drivers/ide/ide-cs.c Fri Feb 9 20:40:02 2001
+++ linux/drivers/ide/ide-cs.c Tue Jun 26 21:22:19 2001
@@ -324,6 +324,9 @@
if (link->io.NumPorts2)
release_region(link->io.BasePort2, link->io.NumPorts2);
+ outb(0x02, ctl_base); // Set nIEN = disable device interrupts
+ // else it hangs on PCI-Cardbus add-in cards,
wedging irq
+
/* retry registration in case device is still spinning up */
for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
hd = ide_register(io_base, ctl_base, link->irq.AssignedIRQ);
--- linux245.orig/drivers/ide/ide-probe.c Sun Mar 18 18:25:02 2001
+++ linux/drivers/ide/ide-probe.c Tue Jun 26 21:25:07 2001
@@ -685,6 +685,8 @@
#else /* !CONFIG_IDEPCI_SHARE_IRQ */
int sa = (hwif->chipset == ide_pci) ? SA_INTERRUPT|SA_SHIRQ
: SA_INTERRUPT;
#endif /* CONFIG_IDEPCI_SHARE_IRQ */
+
+ outb(0x00, hwif->io_ports[IDE_CONTROL_OFFSET]); // clear
nIEN == enable irqs
if (ide_request_irq(hwif->irq, &ide_intr, sa, hwif->name,
hwgroup)) {
if (!match)
kfree(hwgroup);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread* Re: PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7
2001-08-02 14:18 ` Alan Cox
@ 2001-08-02 19:07 ` Alan Olsen
2001-08-02 17:58 ` Alan Cox
0 siblings, 1 reply; 90+ messages in thread
From: Alan Olsen @ 2001-08-02 19:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Cox; +Cc: Keith Owens, Linux Kernel
On Thu, 2 Aug 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> > When I insert the card, I get a beep from the cardmgr program seeing the
> > card being inserted. Then the whole system refuses to respond to anything
> > on the keyboard. (I have not tested if the system is reachable by network
> > when that happens.)
>
> Gunther posted this patch ages ago which seems to solve the problem
I will try that. Any reason it did not make it to 2.4.7?
alan@ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply
Alan Olsen | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys.
"All power is derived from the barrel of a gnu." - Mao Tse Stallman
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7
2001-08-02 19:07 ` Alan Olsen
@ 2001-08-02 17:58 ` Alan Cox
2001-08-02 19:21 ` Alan Olsen
2001-08-02 20:48 ` Alan Olsen
0 siblings, 2 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2001-08-02 17:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Olsen; +Cc: Alan Cox, Keith Owens, Linux Kernel
> > Gunther posted this patch ages ago which seems to solve the problem
>
> I will try that. Any reason it did not make it to 2.4.7?
Andre didnt like it for obscure ATA technical reasons. If it works then
personally I think its a candidate to go in anyway
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7
2001-08-02 17:58 ` Alan Cox
@ 2001-08-02 19:21 ` Alan Olsen
2001-08-02 20:48 ` Alan Olsen
1 sibling, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Alan Olsen @ 2001-08-02 19:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Cox; +Cc: Keith Owens, Linux Kernel
On Thu, 2 Aug 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > Gunther posted this patch ages ago which seems to solve the problem
> >
> > I will try that. Any reason it did not make it to 2.4.7?
>
> Andre didnt like it for obscure ATA technical reasons. If it works then
> personally I think its a candidate to go in anyway
Well, without the patch it does *not* work. I will make sure it functions
with this card. (Weird finding PCMCIA PCI cards in the electronic camera
supply section.)
alan@ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply
Alan Olsen | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys.
"All power is derived from the barrel of a gnu." - Mao Tse Stallman
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7
2001-08-02 17:58 ` Alan Cox
2001-08-02 19:21 ` Alan Olsen
@ 2001-08-02 20:48 ` Alan Olsen
1 sibling, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Alan Olsen @ 2001-08-02 20:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Cox; +Cc: Keith Owens, Linux Kernel
On Thu, 2 Aug 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > Gunther posted this patch ages ago which seems to solve the problem
> >
> > I will try that. Any reason it did not make it to 2.4.7?
>
> Andre didnt like it for obscure ATA technical reasons. If it works then
> personally I think its a candidate to go in anyway
Well, it gets rid of the hanging behaviour. There is a bit of
sluggishness, but it is because it is trying to setup ide2 and failing.
Aug 2 11:28:38 summanulla kernel: hde: IBM-DADA-26480, ATA DISK drive
Aug 2 11:28:38 summanulla kernel: hde: IBM-DADA-26480, ATA DISK drive
Aug 2 11:28:38 summanulla kernel: ide2: Disabled unable to get IRQ 5.
Aug 2 11:28:38 summanulla kernel: ide2: Disabled unable to get IRQ 5.
Aug 2 11:28:40 summanulla kernel: hde: ERROR, PORTS ALREADY IN USE
Aug 2 11:28:40 summanulla kernel: hde: ERROR, PORTS ALREADY IN USE
Aug 2 11:28:42 summanulla kernel: ide2: ports already in use, skipping
probe
Aug 2 11:28:42 summanulla kernel: ide2: ports already in use, skipping
probe
Aug 2 11:28:53 summanulla last message repeated 7 times
Aug 2 11:28:53 summanulla kernel: ide_cs: ide_register() at 0x110 &
0x11e, irq 5 failed
Aug 2 11:28:53 summanulla last message repeated 7 times
Aug 2 11:28:53 summanulla kernel: ide_cs: ide_register() at 0x110 &
0x11e, irq 5 failed
Aug 2 11:28:53 summanulla kernel: Trying to free nonexistent resource
<00000110-0000011f>
Aug 2 11:28:53 summanulla kernel: Trying to free nonexistent resource
<00000110-0000011f>
Aug 2 11:28:54 summanulla cardmgr[1023]: get dev info on socket 1 failed:
Resource temporarily unavailable
Aug 2 11:29:51 summanulla cardmgr[1023]: shutting down socket 1
Aug 2 11:29:51 summanulla cardmgr[1023]: executing: 'modprobe -r ide-cs'
I need to look at where ide2 is trying to be set later. (I have a LUG
meeting to get ready for.)
alan@ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply
Alan Olsen | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys.
"All power is derived from the barrel of a gnu." - Mao Tse Stallman
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7
2001-08-01 5:42 ` Alan Olsen
2001-08-02 14:18 ` Alan Cox
@ 2001-08-16 0:04 ` Paul Mackerras
1 sibling, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Paul Mackerras @ 2001-08-16 0:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Cox; +Cc: Linux Kernel
Alan Cox writes:
> Gunther posted this patch ages ago which seems to solve the problem
I found that the first part (adding outb(0x02, ctl_base)) was
necessary but the second part (outb(0, ...)) was not. Setting nIEN
early on seems safe to me, but it was not clear to me that enabling
IRQs (clearing nIEN) just before the ide_request_irq call was safe -
fortunately it doesn't seem to be necessary, I presume the IDE code
clears nIEN when it wants to start getting interrupts.
On my powerbook I also use a patch which makes sure that the chipset
gets set to ide_pci so that the IDE code will let me share the irq -
the pcmcia controller here has just one interrupt that is used both
for card interrupts and for controller interrupts. I'm not sure
whether that came from Gunther or someone else.
Paul.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: [OT] Virii (sic)
2001-07-31 23:51 ` [OT] Virii (sic) Guest section DW
2001-08-01 4:03 ` PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7 Alan Olsen
@ 2001-08-01 6:58 ` Riley Williams
2001-08-01 8:13 ` [Ridiculously OT] " David Huen
` (3 more replies)
1 sibling, 4 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Riley Williams @ 2001-08-01 6:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Guest section DW; +Cc: Linux Kernel
Hi.
>> on average, there's a timelapse of 53 hours from a virii first
> For some reason, seeing "virii" is somewhat painful to my eye. I
> know, people invent fantasy plurals, like Vaxen and
> Unices/Unixen, but somehow this is worse, yes indeed, it is
> badder.
> [The singular is virus. The plural in English is viruses. In
> Latin there is no plural - it is even debatable whether virus is
> a noun in Latin - in any case it is indeclinable.]
During my medical training, it was made abundantly clear that the
plural of virus is virii. Since the whole idea of a computer virus
comes from the medical world, I'd have to assume the terminology came
with it.
I'll stick with what my training taught me.
Best wishes from Riley.
PS: Plural of bacteria is bacterium, from the same source.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread* Re: [Ridiculously OT] Virii (sic)
2001-08-01 6:58 ` [OT] Virii (sic) Riley Williams
@ 2001-08-01 8:13 ` David Huen
2001-08-02 7:33 ` Riley Williams
2001-08-01 8:56 ` [OT] " Nadav Har'El
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 1 reply; 90+ messages in thread
From: David Huen @ 2001-08-01 8:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Riley Williams; +Cc: Guest section DW, Linux Kernel
On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Riley Williams wrote:
> plural of virus is virii. Since the whole idea of a computer virus
> comes from the medical world, I'd have to assume the terminology came
> with it.
>
> I'll stick with what my training taught me.
As an ex-virologist, English usage has its plural as viruses almost
everywhere, even in books written in "U.S." English. Even in medical
virology texts in the aforesaid language.
Not that Caesar ever spoke at length concerning viruses, but viral
taxonomies usually refer to viruses of a kind with a collective noun
ending with thus:-
papillomaviridae - wart viruses
herpesviridae - herpesviruses
retroviridae - retroviruses
Here's an example of both the plural "viruses" and the collective
ending being used...
http://www.utoronto.ca/virology/bio351/papova/Papova.html
Indeed, if you should search Google for the terms "viruses" and "virii",
the former will find mostly biological/medical pages while the latter
while the latter finds almost exclusively descriptions of computer
"virii" which may be indicative of the orgin of the latter.
I look forward to computer virus taxonomies discussing Sircamidae and no
doubt Code Red could be classified as member of phylum Annelidae with
Linnean name Tabes whitehouseii.
>
> PS: Plural of bacteria is bacterium, from the same source.
>
You did mean it the other way round, didn't you?
D. Huen, Dept. of Genetics, U. of Cambridge
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread* Re: [Ridiculously OT] Virii (sic)
2001-08-01 8:13 ` [Ridiculously OT] " David Huen
@ 2001-08-02 7:33 ` Riley Williams
2001-08-02 10:04 ` Manfred Bartz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 90+ messages in thread
From: Riley Williams @ 2001-08-02 7:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Huen; +Cc: Linux Kernel
Hi David.
>> plural of virus is virii. Since the whole idea of a computer
>> virus comes from the medical world, I'd have to assume the
>> terminology came with it.
>>
>> I'll stick with what my training taught me.
> As an ex-virologist, English usage has its plural as viruses
> almost everywhere, even in books written in "U.S." English.
> Even in medical virology texts in the aforesaid language.
{Shrug} Blame my training on the medical staff at Aberdeen Royal
Infirmiry, Scotland, where I did the 18 months of medical training
that I have behind me before switching to Computing...
> Not that Caesar ever spoke at length concerning viruses, but
> viral taxonomies usually refer to viruses of a kind with a
> collective noun ending with thus:-
>
> papillomaviridae - wart viruses
> herpesviridae - herpesviruses
> retroviridae - retroviruses
>
> Here's an example of both the plural "viruses" and the
> collective ending being used...
>
> http://www.utoronto.ca/virology/bio351/papova/Papova.html
>
> Indeed, if you should search Google for the terms "viruses" and
> "virii", the former will find mostly biological/medical pages
> while the latter while the latter finds almost exclusively
> descriptions of computer "virii" which may be indicative of the
> orgin of the latter.
>
> I look forward to computer virus taxonomies discussing
> Sircamidae and no doubt Code Red could be classified as member
> of phylum Annelidae with Linnean name Tabes whitehouseii.
>> PS: Plural of bacteria is bacterium, from the same source.
> You did mean it the other way round, didn't you?
I did, yes - blame that on a brain failure...mine!
> D. Huen, Dept. of Genetics, U. of Cambridge
Best wishes from Riley.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: [OT] Virii (sic)
2001-08-01 6:58 ` [OT] Virii (sic) Riley Williams
2001-08-01 8:13 ` [Ridiculously OT] " David Huen
@ 2001-08-01 8:56 ` Nadav Har'El
2001-08-01 9:13 ` Alessandro Suardi
` (3 more replies)
2001-08-01 10:03 ` Vojtech Pavlik
2001-08-02 3:46 ` Rik van Riel
3 siblings, 4 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Nadav Har'El @ 2001-08-01 8:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Riley Williams; +Cc: Guest section DW, Linux Kernel
On Wed, Aug 01, 2001, Riley Williams wrote about "Re: [OT] Virii (sic)":
> > [The singular is virus. The plural in English is viruses. In
> > Latin there is no plural - it is even debatable whether virus is
> > a noun in Latin - in any case it is indeclinable.]
What I don't understand is why people use the form virii, with a double I!
Just like the plural of abacus is abaci, the plural of cactus is cacti
(check the dictionary if you don't believe me), shouldn't the plural of
virus be viri, with one I at the end (of course, "viruses" is also currently
accepted as a plural, and even preferred by some people).
I think people get confused by the fact that the plural of radius is radii.
That extra "I" comes from the i in radius - it shouldn't appear in the plural
of "virus"! The plural of the different word "virius" should have been virii.
> PS: Plural of bacteria is bacterium, from the same source.
Note that bacteria is already plural - bacterium is the singular.
There's a more computer relevant fact: "data" is a plural noun, whose
singular is "datum". Similarly, "media" is plural, whose singular is
"medium". So constructions like "datas" or "medias" are wrong, although
they are becoming more and more accepted...
Does anybody still use the form formulae as a plural of formula? I do, but
I think I belong to a dying breed :)
[Oops, I don't think this discussion is very relevant to Linux kernels any
more...]
--
Nadav Har'El | Wednesday, Aug 1 2001, 12 Av 5761
nyh@math.technion.ac.il |-----------------------------------------
Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |A city is a large community where people
http://nadav.harel.org.il |are lonesome together.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread* Re: [OT] Virii (sic)
2001-08-01 8:56 ` [OT] " Nadav Har'El
@ 2001-08-01 9:13 ` Alessandro Suardi
2001-08-01 10:38 ` Wakko Warner
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Alessandro Suardi @ 2001-08-01 9:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nadav Har'El; +Cc: Riley Williams, Guest section DW, Linux Kernel
Nadav Har'El wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2001, Riley Williams wrote about "Re: [OT] Virii (sic)":
> > > [The singular is virus. The plural in English is viruses. In
> > > Latin there is no plural - it is even debatable whether virus is
> > > a noun in Latin - in any case it is indeclinable.]
>
> What I don't understand is why people use the form virii, with a double I!
>
> Just like the plural of abacus is abaci, the plural of cactus is cacti
> (check the dictionary if you don't believe me), shouldn't the plural of
> virus be viri, with one I at the end (of course, "viruses" is also currently
> accepted as a plural, and even preferred by some people).
>
> I think people get confused by the fact that the plural of radius is radii.
> That extra "I" comes from the i in radius - it shouldn't appear in the plural
> of "virus"! The plural of the different word "virius" should have been virii.
As Andries says, there is no known use of plural of 3 nouns from the
2nd Latin declension: vulgus, pelagus and of course virus.
This is btw referenced here: http://language.perl.com/misc/virus.html .
Hopefully the thread can be dropped...
--alessandro
"Nothing can light / the dark of the night / like a falling star"
(Julee Cruise, "Until the end of the world" soundtrack)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread* Re: [OT] Virii (sic)
2001-08-01 8:56 ` [OT] " Nadav Har'El
2001-08-01 9:13 ` Alessandro Suardi
@ 2001-08-01 10:38 ` Wakko Warner
2001-08-01 10:44 ` Jean-Luc
2001-08-02 1:57 ` Johan Kullstam
3 siblings, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Wakko Warner @ 2001-08-01 10:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nadav Har'El; +Cc: Riley Williams, Guest section DW, Linux Kernel
> Just like the plural of abacus is abaci, the plural of cactus is cacti
> (check the dictionary if you don't believe me), shouldn't the plural of
> virus be viri, with one I at the end (of course, "viruses" is also currently
> accepted as a plural, and even preferred by some people).
If the plural of mouse is mice, shouldn't the plural of spouce be spice?
--
Lab tests show that use of micro$oft causes cancer in lab animals
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: [OT] Virii (sic)
2001-08-01 8:56 ` [OT] " Nadav Har'El
2001-08-01 9:13 ` Alessandro Suardi
2001-08-01 10:38 ` Wakko Warner
@ 2001-08-01 10:44 ` Jean-Luc
2001-08-02 1:57 ` Johan Kullstam
3 siblings, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Jean-Luc @ 2001-08-01 10:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Stoooooooooooooooop !!
PLEASE
-------
Jean-Luc
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: [OT] Virii (sic)
2001-08-01 8:56 ` [OT] " Nadav Har'El
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2001-08-01 10:44 ` Jean-Luc
@ 2001-08-02 1:57 ` Johan Kullstam
3 siblings, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Johan Kullstam @ 2001-08-02 1:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
"Nadav Har'El" <nyh@math.technion.ac.il> writes:
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2001, Riley Williams wrote about "Re: [OT] Virii (sic)":
> > > [The singular is virus. The plural in English is viruses. In
> > > Latin there is no plural - it is even debatable whether virus is
> > > a noun in Latin - in any case it is indeclinable.]
>
> What I don't understand is why people use the form virii, with a double I!
>
> Just like the plural of abacus is abaci, the plural of cactus is cacti
> (check the dictionary if you don't believe me), shouldn't the plural of
> virus be viri, with one I at the end (of course, "viruses" is also currently
> accepted as a plural, and even preferred by some people).
>
> I think people get confused by the fact that the plural of radius is radii.
> That extra "I" comes from the i in radius - it shouldn't appear in the plural
> of "virus"! The plural of the different word "virius" should have been virii.
>
> > PS: Plural of bacteria is bacterium, from the same source.
>
> Note that bacteria is already plural - bacterium is the singular.
>
> There's a more computer relevant fact: "data" is a plural noun, whose
> singular is "datum". Similarly, "media" is plural, whose singular is
> "medium". So constructions like "datas" or "medias" are wrong, although
> they are becoming more and more accepted...
>
> Does anybody still use the form formulae as a plural of formula? I do, but
> I think I belong to a dying breed :)
>
> [Oops, I don't think this discussion is very relevant to Linux kernels any
> more...]
and the ever popular boni for plural of bonus ;-)
--
J o h a n K u l l s t a m
[kullstam@ne.mediaone.net]
Don't Fear the Penguin!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: [OT] Virii (sic)
2001-08-01 6:58 ` [OT] Virii (sic) Riley Williams
2001-08-01 8:13 ` [Ridiculously OT] " David Huen
2001-08-01 8:56 ` [OT] " Nadav Har'El
@ 2001-08-01 10:03 ` Vojtech Pavlik
2001-08-02 3:46 ` Rik van Riel
3 siblings, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Vojtech Pavlik @ 2001-08-01 10:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Riley Williams; +Cc: Guest section DW, Linux Kernel
On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 07:58:51AM +0100, Riley Williams wrote:
> Hi.
>
> >> on average, there's a timelapse of 53 hours from a virii first
>
> > For some reason, seeing "virii" is somewhat painful to my eye. I
> > know, people invent fantasy plurals, like Vaxen and
> > Unices/Unixen, but somehow this is worse, yes indeed, it is
> > badder.
>
> > [The singular is virus. The plural in English is viruses. In
> > Latin there is no plural - it is even debatable whether virus is
> > a noun in Latin - in any case it is indeclinable.]
>
> During my medical training, it was made abundantly clear that the
> plural of virus is virii. Since the whole idea of a computer virus
> comes from the medical world, I'd have to assume the terminology came
> with it.
>
> I'll stick with what my training taught me.
>
> Best wishes from Riley.
>
> PS: Plural of bacteria is bacterium, from the same source.
Uh? I'd say it's the other way around at least ...
--
Vojtech Pavlik
SuSE Labs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: [OT] Virii (sic)
2001-08-01 6:58 ` [OT] Virii (sic) Riley Williams
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2001-08-01 10:03 ` Vojtech Pavlik
@ 2001-08-02 3:46 ` Rik van Riel
3 siblings, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Rik van Riel @ 2001-08-02 3:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Riley Williams; +Cc: Guest section DW, Linux Kernel
On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Riley Williams wrote:
> I'll stick with what my training taught me.
> PS: Plural of bacteria is bacterium, from the same source.
"For badder or worse."
Rik
--
Executive summary of a recent Microsoft press release:
"we are concerned about the GNU General Public License (GPL)"
http://www.surriel.com/
http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 18:02 ` Virii on vger.kernel.org lists Riley Williams
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2001-07-31 19:18 ` William Scott Lockwood III
@ 2001-07-31 22:00 ` Matti Aarnio
2001-07-31 22:16 ` William Scott Lockwood III
2001-08-01 10:49 ` Dominik Kubla
4 siblings, 1 reply; 90+ messages in thread
From: Matti Aarnio @ 2001-07-31 22:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Riley Williams; +Cc: Linux Kernel
On Tue, Jul 31, 2001 at 07:02:18PM +0100, Riley Williams wrote:
> Hi Matti.
>
> First, let's have a subject that reflects the content...
Ack, should have done that long ago...
....
> > Of course in case of Viruses using OE security bugs, we all are
> > seeing the distilled evil.
>
> Is there any way we can set up an automatic virus scan of all
> attachments at vger, and have it deal with any virii at source?
>
> Come to that, is there a decent Linux-based virus scanner around?
I have been asked, several times, if I could integrate some
virus scanner wrapper, like Amavis, into ZMailer. The more I think
of that, the more it appears to be stuff for 3.x series of ZMailer;
not for current 2.x ... but the technology slated for 3.x implements
something like 2/3 of Amavis for other internal system purposes ...
Nevertheless, that is just the interface from email system to separate
file scanner. Those scanners are available in abundance for winblows,
but are very rare for anything else. Amavis pages seem to point to
a bunch of products with Linux support, so perhaps there are something
usefull to be plugged in ?
> > Doing it at lists is waste of time, and misses *MY* attention!
> Hopefully, this caught your attention...
>
> Best wishes from Riley.
/Matti Aarnio
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread* Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 22:00 ` Virii on vger.kernel.org lists Matti Aarnio
@ 2001-07-31 22:16 ` William Scott Lockwood III
0 siblings, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: William Scott Lockwood III @ 2001-07-31 22:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matti Aarnio; +Cc: linux-kernel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matti Aarnio" <matti.aarnio@zmailer.org>
To: "Riley Williams" <rhw@MemAlpha.CX>
Cc: "Linux Kernel" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 5:00 PM
Subject: Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
| Nevertheless, that is just the interface from email system to separate
| file scanner. Those scanners are available in abundance for winblows,
| but are very rare for anything else. Amavis pages seem to point to
| a bunch of products with Linux support, so perhaps there are something
| usefull to be plugged in ?
http://www.mcafeeb2b.com/naicommon/buy-try/try/products-evals.asp
Go there, select your language and LINUX, and you will get a survey to
fill out that then lets you test drive their stuff for linux.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread
* Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-07-31 18:02 ` Virii on vger.kernel.org lists Riley Williams
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2001-07-31 22:00 ` Virii on vger.kernel.org lists Matti Aarnio
@ 2001-08-01 10:49 ` Dominik Kubla
2001-08-01 11:04 ` Dominik Kubla
4 siblings, 1 reply; 90+ messages in thread
From: Dominik Kubla @ 2001-08-01 10:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Riley Williams; +Cc: Matti Aarnio, christophe barb?, Linux Kernel
On Tue, Jul 31, 2001 at 07:02:18PM +0100, Riley Williams wrote:
> Is there any way we can set up an automatic virus scan of all
> attachments at vger, and have it deal with any virii at source?
Yes: www.amavis.org
> Come to that, is there a decent Linux-based virus scanner around?
The german antivirus tool AntiVir is free for personal use (www.free-av.com)
and i am pretty sure they would sponsor a version for the list server if asked
(if linux-kernel would be considered commercial use).
But even better would be to also use the procmail sanitizer:
ftp://ftp.rubyriver.com/pub/jhardin/antispam/procmail-security.html
It does not scan for virii but defangs attachments and html tags so that
braindamaged apps would not automatically execute the required interpreter
for the virus.
Dominik Kubla
--
ScioByte GmbH, Zum Schiersteiner Grund 2, 55127 Mainz (Germany)
Phone: +49 6131 550 117 Fax: +49 6131 610 99 16
GnuPG: 717F16BB / A384 F5F1 F566 5716 5485 27EF 3B00 C007 717F 16BB
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread* Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists
2001-08-01 10:49 ` Dominik Kubla
@ 2001-08-01 11:04 ` Dominik Kubla
0 siblings, 0 replies; 90+ messages in thread
From: Dominik Kubla @ 2001-08-01 11:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dominik Kubla
Cc: Riley Williams, Matti Aarnio, christophe barb?, Linux Kernel
On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 12:49:56PM +0200, Dominik Kubla wrote:
> The german antivirus tool AntiVir is free for personal use (www.free-av.com)
> and i am pretty sure they would sponsor a version for the list server if asked
> (if linux-kernel would be considered commercial use).
Hmm. Apparently their free product is just available for Windows. ARGH! But
one can pickup an evaluation version for Linux from their commercial site:
www.antivir.de.
Dominik Kubla
--
ScioByte GmbH, Zum Schiersteiner Grund 2, 55127 Mainz (Germany)
Phone: +49 6131 550 117 Fax: +49 6131 610 99 16
GnuPG: 717F16BB / A384 F5F1 F566 5716 5485 27EF 3B00 C007 717F 16BB
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 90+ messages in thread