- sensibilium
- » sensiblog
- » Back to Work
Back to Work
This weekend last (yesterday, the day before yesterday, and the evening of the day before the day before yesterday) is already over.
Live 8 went off with a bang, lots of stuff happening, as well as the BBC finding a use for their digital TV service, enabling the ability of selecting between 3 concerts, Hyde Park, The Eden Project, and Philidelphia.
It didn't work too well at first. The Hyde Park channel actually took you to BBC News which was on BBC1 at the time. It was supposed to have switched from BBC2 to BBC1 earlier, but due to Wimbledon going on longer than they thought, it hadn't switched. Eventually they got it connected to the correct feed from BBC2. Five minutes later, they switched Live 8 over to BBC1, so the poor engineers must have been struggling after all that time fixing the BBC2 issue, they now had to switch the feed over to BBC1 instead (and update the digital selection box). They managed this quite quickly but in the process feckered up the feed from Philly. I found this incredibly amusing.
They did get it sorted in the end though. I enjoyed Snoop Dogg, with his uncensored 'mother-fuck' this, 'mother-fucking' that, 'bitch', 'ho', 'nigger', the lot came out pre-watershed and unbleeped. Nice job there Snoop. It seemed that every other artist wanted a piece of the Snoop pie, and they all came on and swore before beginning their set. Even Madonna said "Make some fucking noise!"
I shouted, "You're a talentless old cow, Madonna!" And she began to sing in that I-can't-sing voice of hers. I switched over to the Eden Project and watched ...... Umbata, some African singer woman with a REAL singing voice. She was very good.
Erm, I'm back at work. Time to leave this now.
Live 8 went off with a bang, lots of stuff happening, as well as the BBC finding a use for their digital TV service, enabling the ability of selecting between 3 concerts, Hyde Park, The Eden Project, and Philidelphia.
It didn't work too well at first. The Hyde Park channel actually took you to BBC News which was on BBC1 at the time. It was supposed to have switched from BBC2 to BBC1 earlier, but due to Wimbledon going on longer than they thought, it hadn't switched. Eventually they got it connected to the correct feed from BBC2. Five minutes later, they switched Live 8 over to BBC1, so the poor engineers must have been struggling after all that time fixing the BBC2 issue, they now had to switch the feed over to BBC1 instead (and update the digital selection box). They managed this quite quickly but in the process feckered up the feed from Philly. I found this incredibly amusing.
They did get it sorted in the end though. I enjoyed Snoop Dogg, with his uncensored 'mother-fuck' this, 'mother-fucking' that, 'bitch', 'ho', 'nigger', the lot came out pre-watershed and unbleeped. Nice job there Snoop. It seemed that every other artist wanted a piece of the Snoop pie, and they all came on and swore before beginning their set. Even Madonna said "Make some fucking noise!"
I shouted, "You're a talentless old cow, Madonna!" And she began to sing in that I-can't-sing voice of hers. I switched over to the Eden Project and watched ...... Umbata, some African singer woman with a REAL singing voice. She was very good.
Erm, I'm back at work. Time to leave this now.
- This post has 19 comments, the last was posted by 4000MilesAway on Wed 12 Jul 2006 at 2:40am GMT
Comments
my post wasn't supposed to come here!
What you mean? Why not?
Look at the age of this post. Where the fek would I be able to drag this from?
As a side line:
Today I was complicating my backup system even further. To cut an overly long and boring story short - the backup sends an email containing many logs in a rar file. The rar was originally unencrypted and would arive in my inbox within a few seconds. I put a 64 Character password on the file & the rar takes 5 minutes to arive. Fluke? no, remove pw, again almost imediate, restore pw - 5 minutes.
Now I need to redesign my mail script to use SSL. Feck. The ISP I use either is, or will be soon re-owned by AT&T http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,71146-0.html which really sucks. Incase you hadn't read or heard the news above, the nsa has been found spying on all net traffic. I'm not implying that is exactly what is happening here, but since it's a repeatable scenario it's certainly troubling.
Today I was complicating my backup system even further. To cut an overly long and boring story short - the backup sends an email containing many logs in a rar file. The rar was originally unencrypted and would arive in my inbox within a few seconds. I put a 64 Character password on the file & the rar takes 5 minutes to arive. Fluke? no, remove pw, again almost imediate, restore pw - 5 minutes.
Now I need to redesign my mail script to use SSL. Feck. The ISP I use either is, or will be soon re-owned by AT&T http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,71146-0.html which really sucks. Incase you hadn't read or heard the news above, the nsa has been found spying on all net traffic. I'm not implying that is exactly what is happening here, but since it's a repeatable scenario it's certainly troubling.
Further viewing of the headders of the emails that come through show that the mail is being held up in a chain of servers within my ISP.
If I can figure out SSL/TLS from a script, I may take that road.
perhaps perl or python can do it. Or maybe there's a more sophisticated way around this. email a notification containing a link to a locally stored log.... argh enough with the blathering...
and what the fek happened to the url http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,71146-0.html
If I can figure out SSL/TLS from a script, I may take that road.
perhaps perl or python can do it. Or maybe there's a more sophisticated way around this. email a notification containing a link to a locally stored log.... argh enough with the blathering...
and what the fek happened to the url http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,71146-0.html
I see, you squashed urls.
bah
bah
Return-path: <xxxxxxxxx@xxxxx.xxx>
Envelope-to: xxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx
Delivery-date: Sat, 08 Jul 2006 00:50:11 -0700
Received: from xxxxxxx by xxxxxx.xxxxx.xxx with local-bsmtp (Exim 4.52)
id 1Fz7Zo-0000QU-S3
for xxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx; Sat, 08 Jul 2006 00:50:10 -0700
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on xxxxxx.xxxxx.xxx
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=3.2 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,NO_REAL_NAME
autolearn=no version=3.1.3
Received: from [205.152.59.64] (helo=imf16aec.mail.bellsouth.net)
by xxxxxx.xxxxx.xxx with esmtp (Exim 4.52)
id 1Fz7Zo-0000QE-Kd
for xxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx; Sat, 08 Jul 2006 00:50:08 -0700
Received: from ibm66aec-qfe0 ([192.168.51.76])
by imf16aec.mail.bellsouth.net with ESMTP
id <20060708075002.EXDB6598.imf16aec.mail.bellsouth.net@ibm66aec-qfe0>
for <xxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx>; Sat, 8 Jul 2006 03:50:02 -0400
Received: from ibm66aec.bellsouth.net ([67.34.7.119])
by imf23aec.mail.bellsouth.net with ESMTP
id <20060708074604.QYYE28176.imf23aec.mail.bellsouth.net@ibm66aec.bellsouth.net>
for <xxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx>; Sat, 8 Jul 2006 03:46:04 -0400
Received: from xxxxxxxii ([67.34.7.119]) by ibm66aec.bellsouth.net with SMTP
id <20060708074603.MUL18054.ibm66aec.bellsouth.net@xxxxxxxii>
for <xxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx>; Sat, 8 Jul 2006 03:46:03 -0400
thread-index: AcaiYo/y5A7HFG8wS8KBWasD2SmaEg==
Thread-Topic: Local backup
From: <xxxxxxxxx@xxxxx.xxx>
To: <xxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc:
Subject: Local backup
Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2006 03:46:03 -0400
Message-ID: <000001c6a262$90295380$1401a8c0@xxxxxxx.xxx>
X-Mailer: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000
Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
Importance: normal
Priority: normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.0
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="HKMNOPQSTUVWXZabcdeghijklnopqrsuvwxyz023"
X-BLTSYMAVREINSERT: gqqyY+qvD0Tc8UtGavom9aOk5hIA
Envelope-to: xxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx
Delivery-date: Sat, 08 Jul 2006 00:50:11 -0700
Received: from xxxxxxx by xxxxxx.xxxxx.xxx with local-bsmtp (Exim 4.52)
id 1Fz7Zo-0000QU-S3
for xxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx; Sat, 08 Jul 2006 00:50:10 -0700
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on xxxxxx.xxxxx.xxx
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=3.2 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,NO_REAL_NAME
autolearn=no version=3.1.3
Received: from [205.152.59.64] (helo=imf16aec.mail.bellsouth.net)
by xxxxxx.xxxxx.xxx with esmtp (Exim 4.52)
id 1Fz7Zo-0000QE-Kd
for xxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx; Sat, 08 Jul 2006 00:50:08 -0700
Received: from ibm66aec-qfe0 ([192.168.51.76])
by imf16aec.mail.bellsouth.net with ESMTP
id <20060708075002.EXDB6598.imf16aec.mail.bellsouth.net@ibm66aec-qfe0>
for <xxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx>; Sat, 8 Jul 2006 03:50:02 -0400
Received: from ibm66aec.bellsouth.net ([67.34.7.119])
by imf23aec.mail.bellsouth.net with ESMTP
id <20060708074604.QYYE28176.imf23aec.mail.bellsouth.net@ibm66aec.bellsouth.net>
for <xxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx>; Sat, 8 Jul 2006 03:46:04 -0400
Received: from xxxxxxxii ([67.34.7.119]) by ibm66aec.bellsouth.net with SMTP
id <20060708074603.MUL18054.ibm66aec.bellsouth.net@xxxxxxxii>
for <xxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx>; Sat, 8 Jul 2006 03:46:03 -0400
thread-index: AcaiYo/y5A7HFG8wS8KBWasD2SmaEg==
Thread-Topic: Local backup
From: <xxxxxxxxx@xxxxx.xxx>
To: <xxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc:
Subject: Local backup
Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2006 03:46:03 -0400
Message-ID: <000001c6a262$90295380$1401a8c0@xxxxxxx.xxx>
X-Mailer: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000
Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
Importance: normal
Priority: normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.0
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="HKMNOPQSTUVWXZabcdeghijklnopqrsuvwxyz023"
X-BLTSYMAVREINSERT: gqqyY+qvD0Tc8UtGavom9aOk5hIA
I haven't smashed URLs, it's just guests who cannot post links. If you allowed me to add yur name, you could add working urls (as well as other formatting features).
Okay, so this a post that is more than a year old, still not sure what yur getting at.
Why would a 64char pass on a rar delay emails? That's not only weird, but quite baffling too.
Why would a 64char pass on a rar delay emails? That's not only weird, but quite baffling too.
I'm not usually of a paranoid mind, however we know the ISP's scan email content and attachments, a simple text email would be scanned quickly, an email with a rar attachment would likely be scanned quickly along with its attachment. However when there's a delay when you introduce a password - that signals that their system is either cataloguing the rar for later analysis, or perhaps attempting to break the password before sending it to its destination. Their system should be more transparent than that.
A dictianary attack wouldn't be able to break it quickly.
I use(d) this to generate them: https://www.grc.com/passwords.htm
A dictianary attack wouldn't be able to break it quickly.
I use(d) this to generate them: https://www.grc.com/passwords.htm
Back to the date thing. As a non registered user, not logged it etc, how would I have pulled up such an old post to add a comment to?
How about a spell checker for the diggggit-ally challllllengeeed? Surely with all your awe inspiring power you can conjour a fully runnig system in a jiffy?
At least you would be spared the horror of reading my typo ridden posts.
At least you would be spared the horror of reading my typo ridden posts.
I have a feeling that it's the scanner timing out after trying to open and scan the contents actually.
Not sure how you dragged the topic up, perhaps you were perusing the articles.php page and stumbled into into it? Maybe you are using a locally stored form?
Spell-checker, po diddle, no way jose (sorry, jose).
Not sure how you dragged the topic up, perhaps you were perusing the articles.php page and stumbled into into it? Maybe you are using a locally stored form?
Spell-checker, po diddle, no way jose (sorry, jose).
If you want me to fix this bug, you need to reproduce it and tell me exactly what you were doing at the time. You know the drill.
not convinced about the scanner timeout. a small 8KB file should scan imediately regardless of encrypted contents. En encrypted file would time out faster surely?
how bout this? http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/
how bout this? http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/
Interestingly, if you also encrypt the headders (file names) and rename the rar to a dat the attachment slips through without delay.
Now that is odd.
Still, you know how it's all the fashion with skiddies to wrap up the virii in .zip files, so perhaps it's unjust paranoia on behalf of the ISPs?
AJAX? Oh gawd, I'm getting sick of hearing about this thing, I suppose I'll have to check it now. Looks good though.
Still, you know how it's all the fashion with skiddies to wrap up the virii in .zip files, so perhaps it's unjust paranoia on behalf of the ISPs?
AJAX? Oh gawd, I'm getting sick of hearing about this thing, I suppose I'll have to check it now. Looks good though.
I can't get the damn thing to work (webtoolkit). Hmm, seems like it don't run under restricted user accounts, throw it away, worthless.
aye could be just the ISP's anti-virus, still strange though. A virus wouldn't usualy be password protected. Would make for an interesting social engineering trick.
I gave up on sending the logs via email, instead I link to the logs in the email.
In general my backup system is getting overly complex & starting to confuse me.
I gave up on sending the logs via email, instead I link to the logs in the email.
In general my backup system is getting overly complex & starting to confuse me.
