Jump to content

zalternate

Members
  • Posts

    1,856
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Speed Test

    My Results
  • Days Won

    25

Posts posted by zalternate

  1. Is anyone using OpenDNS and when they go to Google.com.  Has the page rendered weird this past week, as in slow, or parts fading in to view, or a wait to get to it fully loaded?

    The Google page when using OpenDNS, is a clone page hosted through OpenDNS. Or at least when I went to Google.com, my ShowIP add/on , showed it was opendns's address instead of Googles.

    I've switched dns servers now so I'll have to see if the issue goes away fully.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDNS

    While the OpenDNS name resolution service is free, people have complained about how the service handles failed requests. If a domain cannot be found, the service redirects you to a search page with search results and advertising provided by Yahoo!. A DNS user can switch this off via the OpenDNS Control Panel but will loose content filtering ability. This behavior is similar to that of many large ISP's who also redirect failed requests to their own servers containing advertising. [12]

    In 2007, David Ulevitch explained that in response to Dell installing "Browser Address Error Redirector" software on their PCs, OpenDNS started resolving requests to Google.com. Some of the traffic is handled by OpenDNS typo-correcting service which corrects mistyped addresses and redirects keyword addresses to OpenDNS's search page, while the rest is transparently passed through to the intended recipient.[13]

    Also, a user's search request from the address bar of a browser that is configured to use the Google search engine (with a certain parameter configured) may be covertly redirected to a server owned by OpenDNS without the user's consent (but within the OpenDNS Terms of Service).[14] Users can disable this behavior by logging in to their OpenDNS account and unchecking "OpenDNS proxy" option.[15] Additionally, Mozilla users can fix this problem by installing an extension[16] or by simply changing or removing the navclient sourceid from their keyword search URLs.

    This redirection breaks some non-web applications which rely on getting an NXDOMAIN for non-existent domains, such as e-mail spam filtering, or VPN access where the private network's nameservers are consulted only when the public ones fail to resolve.

  2. Got a collection letter from NCO (the biggest joke of a collection that ever exist)..

    Hughes states I owe them $222+ for my last failed account...One that THEY cancelled because they had no resolution for my sucky*** service/speed issues.

    I guess ECC is going to get another call tomorrow.

    Poor William.

    Ya know, A lot of people in your position, from the start, would of just taken the Hughesnet crap up the backside.  :buck2:

    And now the thing that people crap their pants about(and stops any intension of fighting for whats right) is happening to you. A feeble attempt at freaking up your credit history.

    So now you will have to wait a month or two before your next purchase of a Yacht. And that fabulous island off of the Arab Emirates.  :evil6: :evil6: :evil6: :evil6: :evil6: :evil6:

  3. I'd still have the anti's on it. They'd pull the keyboard from my still cold fingers.   :twisted:

    Well judging by some new laws coming into effect(quite possibly) for the 2010 Olympics(for supposedly two months), Our new un-legal system will declare, that will be $10,000 and 6 months in jail for protesting the fact.

    http://bccla.org/pressreleases/09bill13.html

    BCCLA condemns unlucky B.C. Government Bill 13

    The B.C. Civil Liberties Association today condemned the BC government

  4. So for you Canadians here. How would you like it if your Anti Spyware products were to be deemed Illegal? Maybe even your Anti-Virus as well. Maybe your FireWall will also be Illegal if it blocks DRM or Spyware communications.

    And the CopyRight Lobby would be able to install Spyware and Rootkits on your computer without your permission or knowledge. And maybe legally go into your system to harvest whatever they might be looking for?????

    http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4464/125/

    The Copyright Lobby's Secret Pressure On the Anti-Spam Bill

    Friday October 16, 2009

    As posted earlier today, the Electronic Commerce Protection Act comes to a conclusion in committee on Monday as MPs conduct their "clause by clause" review.  While I have previously written about the lobbying pressure to water down the legislation (aided and abetted by the Liberal and Bloc MPs on the committee) and the CMA's recent effort to create a huge loophole, I have not focused on a key source of the pressure.  Incredibly, it has been the copyright lobby - particularly the software and music industries - that has been engaged in a full court press to make significant changes to the bill.

    The copyright lobby's interest in the bill has been simmering since its introduction, with lobbyists attending the committee hearings and working with Liberal and Bloc MPs to secure changes.  The two core concerns arise from fears that the bill could prevent surreptitious use of DRM and block enforcement initiatives that might involve accessing users' personal computers without their permission.

    The DRM concern arises from a requirement in the bill to obtain consent before installing software programs on users' computers. This anti-spyware provision applies broadly, setting an appropriate standard of protection for computer users.  Yet the copyright lobby fears it could inhibit installation of DRM-type software without full knowledge and consent.  Sources say that the Liberals have introduced a motion that would take these practices outside of the bill.  In its place, they would define computer program as, among other things, "a program that has as its primary function...inducing a user to install software by intentionally misrepresenting that installing that software is necessary to safeguard security or privacy or to open or play content of a computer program." This sets such a high bar - primary function, intentional mispresentation - that music and software industry can plausibly argue that surreptitious DRM installations fall outside of C-27.

    Even more troubling are proposed changes that would allow copyright owners to secretly access information on users' computers.

    PIPEDA currently features a series of exceptions to the standard requirements for obtaining consent for the collection of personal information (found in Section 7). Bill C-27 includes a provision that bars those exceptions in cases involving computer harvesting of email addresses and the "collection of personal information through any means of telecommunication, if the collection is made by accessing a computer system or causing a computer system to be accessed without authorization."  In other words, email harvesting and spyware would not be permitted and would not qualify for the PIPEDA exceptions found in Section 7.

    The copyright lobby is deeply concerned that this change will block attempts to track possible infringement through electronic means.  The Section 7(1)(B) exception in PIPEDA currently  states that collecting personal information without consent or knowledge of the individual is permitted if it is reasonable to expect that the collection "would compromise the availability or accuracy of the information" and the collection is "related to investigating a breach of an agreement or a contravention of the laws of Canada."

    One can well imagine how this exception could be used for investigations targeting the violation of a user agreement or alleged copyright infringement.  With the changes in C-27, the exception would no longer apply to harvesting email addresses or to accessing personal information on computers without authorization.  For the copyright lobby, this would block investigations that involve capturing user information on computers without knowledge or consent.  In response, sources advise that the Liberals have tabled a motion that would exclude Section 7(1)(B) from C-27 - effectively restoring the exception in these circumstances.

    On top of these provisions, sources say the Liberals have also tabled motions to extend the exemptions for telecom providers. The bill currently includes an exemption for telecom providers where they act as intermediaries in the transmission of a spam message (Section 6(6) of the bill).  This obviously makes sense as telecom providers should not be treated as the message sender when they are merely the messenger.  Yet there is a proposed motion that would also create an exception for telecom providers to the requirement to obtain express consent before users install programs on their computers.  It states that the section does not apply to telecom providers providing a telecom service, which is defined to include:

    "providing computer security, user account management, routing and transmission of messages, diagnostics, technical support, repair, network management, network maintenance, authorized updates of software or system firmware, authorized remote system management, and detection or prevention of the unauthorized, fraudulent or illegal use of a network, service, or computer software, including scanning for and removing computer programs"

    These proposed changes are simply outrageous and it is disappointing that the Liberals have brought forward motions on behalf of the lobby in this manner.  With the hearing on Monday, it is critical for Canadians to speak out - yet again - to ensure that C-27 does not leave the door open to private surreptitious surveillance.  Write to Industry Minister Tony Clement, your MP, or the members of the Industry Committee today asking them to reject these changes.  The members of the committee include:

        * Michael Chong (Con), Chair

        * Anthony Rota (Lib), Vice-Chair

        * Robert Bouchard (BQ), Vice-Chair

        * Gordon Brown (Con)

        * Siobhan Coady (Lib)

        * Marc Garneau (Lib)

        * Mike Lake (Con)

        * Brian Masse (NDP)

        * Dave Van Kesteren (Con)

        * Robert Vincent (BQ)

        * Mike Wallace (Con)

        * Chris Warkentin (Con)

  5. There are many, many little laws that are enacted by 1% of the population. And with these laws, no one would Majority vote for without  having proper checks and balances for exactly how innocent people will be treated under those little laws.  And the main illegality of some of these little laws, is there is no vote by the open population on them.

    The BC government said once, "well if you believe we committed a crime, go to your local police detachment and have charges filed against the Government". Knowing full well the officers would tell you to pizz off.

    And the BC Liberal Government said, "Well you voted for us, so we must be doing what you want us to do. So piss off and quit complaining."

    And how do you spend a few million dollars every few weeks? Make a 'donation' to your favorite drunkard/pervert in high Government office.

  6. Kaspersky's online police state, calls for end to net anonymity.

    So lets hear the shouting.  

    Not going to work.

    Passports being faked.

    Hackers taking your passport credentials and pretending to be you online.

    So much easier for the Government to jail you for being a prick, When you divulge the B.S. that the Government does to people.

    Enlarging on a comment on the articles site, on how it will help to keep oppressed women in the desert countries from using the Internet. Since woman are for making babies and washing their masters feet.  :shock:

    And with Passports. How will Kaspersky make his money in crapware fighting? Or will he be the head MAN of the Internet control force. Since if you have a passport and get caught doing something that wasn't you doing it in the first place, You will be shot out of a cannon at a brick wall.  :roll:  While your neighbor Steve Has to now use another neighbors hackable WiFi.  :azn:

    The simple Internet license test is,

    #1 What is Spyware?

    #2 What is a Trojan(and not the condom)?

    #3 What do each of those little lights on your modem and router mean?   :evil6:

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/16/kaspersky_rebukes_net_anonymity/

    Security boss calls for end to net anonymity

    Kaspersky's online police state

    By Dan Goodin in San Francisco

  7. Let me turn this boat around! :2funny: :2funny: :2funny:

    Has anyone tried Vipre by Sunbelt? I guess I'll install it on my spare desktop and get back! [nerdly]

    http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/

    Interesting poll on the site.

    Symantec and McAfee both got sued by New York for 'auto-renewing' peoples product purchases without permission. It's better for the product to warn that it is expiring.

    And lets not forget that a company has your credit card number on file for anyone to steal, even though all servers are impervious to hackers and disgruntled employee's. :tickedoff:

  8. http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/173824/microsofts_free_av_got_15_million_downloads_in_first_week.html

     

    Microsoft's Free AV Got 1.5 Million Downloads in First Week

    Robert McMillan, IDG News Service

    Friday, October 16, 2009 12:10 PM PDT

    Microsoft registered more than 1.5 million downloads of its free antivirus software in the week after it shipped.

    The company's Security Essentials software is a basic antivirus program designed to appeal to Windows users who don't want to shell out the US$40 to $50 per year that most AV vendors charge. It was launched on Sept. 29, and by Oct. 6, the software had been downloaded more than 1.5 million times, according to a Thursday blog post by Microsoft.

    The free AV software has proved popular with Microsoft's Windows 7 operating system, which is available to business users now, but set to be made widely available next Thursday. According to Microsoft, 44 percent of users are running Windows 7, followed by XP (33 percent) and then Vista (23 percent).

    Though XP is not the most popular platform for Security Essentials, it's where the software is doing the most work. Microsoft counted 4 million total malware detections on more than 500,000 machines during the one-week period; 52 percent of them were on XP machines. Vista was next, with 32 percent of detections, followed by Windows 7, with 16 percent. "This follows our usual observed trend of seeing less malware on newer OSes and service packs," Microsoft said.

    The U.S., China and Brazil were the top three countries reporting malware detections, with more than a quarter of all detections occurring in the U.S.

    But the nature of the threats varies somewhat from country to country. "Trojans are the top detected category in the U.S., China has lots of potentially unwanted software threats, and worms (particularly Conficker) are very active in Brazil," Microsoft said. "There are also many exploits being encountered in China, which may mean these PCs do not have the latest security updates."

    Security Essentials is available in 19 countries.

    Antivirus vendors have predictably downplayed the effect of Microsoft's free AV efforts, but the product has received generally favorable reviews as a lightweight but generally effective security product. It competes head-on with AVG's free antivirus software, which has about 85 million users, AVG says.

  9. when I plug directly into my cable modem I show 0% packet loss to that online test site but when I plug the router into the modem and my computer into the router, suddenly I show 100% packet loss to that site.  

    This indicates a configuration or other problem with the router doesn't it?  :undecided:

    You may have to configure your router to allow 'ping packets' to be let back through from the outgoing request, instead of dropping them. If you use the ping command via the run command, your router may stop the ping from getting in and out.

    But depending on router, you can have it drop unsolicited pings from the Internet, while allowing the ping command to work.

  10. Heres a couple of vague news articles on infected routers serving up infected files to the computers connected. The third article has more information on how a router can be infected.

    http://blogs.chron.com/techblog/archives/2009/01/are_wifi_routers_potential_malware_infection_1.html

     Wi-Fi hotspots are wonderfully convenient. As they increase in number, they help fulfill the promise of ubiquitous access to global information.

    But they also come with risk. Legitimate hotspots can be spoofed - you think you're connecting to the coffee shop's router, but you're actually jacking in to an imposter's trap. In addition, if the connection isn't encrypted, the data you're sending can be captured.

    Now, British researchers have given Wi-Fi users one more thing to worry about. They contend that flaws in the software used in many wireless routers, along with the fact that many don't use encryption, could be used to spread malware to the computers that connect to them.

    From the BBC:

       Using modelling methods from real diseases the team showed how a worm could gradually infect all access points in urban areas.

       They found that the majority of vulnerable access points would be hit in the first 24 hours of an outbreak.

       The simulation work showed that within two weeks of an outbreak occurring 55% of wi-fi access points would be compromised. In urban areas this could mean tens of thousands of people were at risk, said the researchers.

       Before now malicious attacks carried out via wi-fi routers have been limited in scope. Most revolve around the creation of fake access points that steal login and other details from those using them to get online.

       The work by Hao Hu, Steven Myers, Vittoria Colizza, and Alessandro Vespignani from the University of Indiana shows how the ubiquitous access points could be used in a much more ambitious attack.

       The theoretical attack modelled by the team involved attempts to subvert the firmware inside a wi-fi access point or router which keeps the device running.

    The BBC doesn't provide much technical detail on the study, but this item at heise Security UK has a little more. The researchers, by the way, have been raising the alarm about this possibility since late 2007. Here's a copy of their study from Feb. 2008 (PDF).

    The researchers looked at Boston, Chicago, New York City, San Francisco, Seattle and the state of Indiana and determined that 20 to 40 percent of wireless nodes are encrypted - the rest are wide open. That seems a bit high to me. In Houston at least, most of the Wi-Fi access points I see are now encrypted, likely thanks to better education about wireless security and the fact that almost all routers come with setup wizards that walk users through securing their networks.

    The researchers theorized that an unsecured network could be compromised by a hacker uploading bogus firmware via a router's updating feature. Once in place, the router would then begin distributing malware to computers that connect to it. Those machines, once used at a different unsecured hotspot, would infect that node.

    The heise item points out that not every router uses the same firmware, and that would prevent a hack such as this from spreading as quickly as the researcher theorize. Still, if attackers targeted an extremely popular model - say, Linksys' WRT54G - they could do some damage.

    To a certain extent, I think this study is overblown - it's a theoretical possibility, but not a realistic one, given the diversity of routers out there. Still, it's one more argument for securing your home network.

    Which you've done. Right?

    Update: Commenter docduke says his router has been infected with malware that apparently is targeting the Internet Assigning Numbers Authority - the body that hands out IP addresses - with a Denial of Service Attack.

       I am here to tell you this is NOT theoretical. I have a wired router, a Linksys BEFSR41, that has been infected. It performs its router and firewall tasks normally, but it is apparently part of a DDoS attack against IANA. Certain other anomalies alerted me that something was going on. I could disconnect everything on my home network, leaving just the router connected to the cable modem, and still it would be energetically communicating with the internet.

       I installed Snort on one of my computers and learned that the router was sending hundreds of packets per minute to IANA. I have communicated with Linksys support. They seem unaware that such a problem could be occurring, but gave me instructions on how to update the firmware inside the router. The router refused the update.

    Update 2.0: See this comment from Jim K., which offers a less malevolent explanation for what may be happening to docduke.

    http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/When-the-neighbour-s-wireless-router-sounds-the-attack-735759.html

     When the neighbour's wireless router sounds the attack

    When thinking about viruses, worms and trojans, we usually think of the internet. But now scientists of Indiana University and of the Institute for Scientific Interchange (ISI) in Italy have investigated wireless networks as a potential platform for the distribution of worms, and have developed an epidemic model depicting how fast such a WiFi worm might spread across a city.

    Wireless routers are especially interesting in this context. They are usually switched on permanently, are available to anyone and have become very popular. Although all models offer security features to protect them from unauthorised access, these features are often not activated by the user, or can be bypassed with very little effort. In the surveyed cities of Chicago, Boston, New York City, San Francisco Bay Area, Seattle and Indiana, the researchers estimate that only 20 to 40 percent of wireless routers operate with cryptographic features such as WEP or WPA enabled. These cities were selected because the public Wireless Geographic Logging Engine (WiGLE) provides sufficient data about the wireless networks available there. According to the WiGLE maps, it is already difficult to find a WiFi-free zone in areas like Manhattan.

    A WiFi worm could infect hundreds of WLAN routers within a very short time.

    Even with cryptographic features enabled, protection is by no means one hundred percent assured. WEP only represents a small hurdle and can be cracked with tools such as aircrack-PTW within a short period of time. Once this hurdle has been overcome, the router's access password needs to be guessed. The research suggests that users often leave their routers' default passwords in place. But even if the password were to be changed, the researchers estimate that it can be cracked in a maximum of 65,000 attempts (the size of the dictionary) in 25 percent of cases. Via the update feature, the worm can then be written into or even replace the firmware, and can then spy out further routers in its vicinity. All that the WiFi worm requires for this task is already available as packages in the OpenWRT Open Source router distribution: kismet, aircrack-NG/PTW etc.

    The epidemic model developed by the study's authors - Hao Hu, Steven Myers, Vittoria Colizza and Alessandro Vespignani - suggests that several tens of thousands of routers could be infected with a worm within two weeks, most of them even within two days. To avoid the potential distribution of these so far only theoretical flying worms, users should be forced to change the default password of their router's configuration interface and to enable WPA functionality with passwords which cannot be guessed.

    The variety of different router models it would encounter while it spreads might also inhibit a worm's distribution. However, the model used in this study did not include that parameter. To infect a WLAN router successfully, a WiFi worm would have to have specific firmware for each individual model. Even under the uniform OpenWRT platform there are numerous images for the various models.

    http://apcmag.com/Content.aspx?id=3687

    New worm can infect home modem/routers

    Samantha Rose Hunt25 March 2009, 2:00 PM

    A new botnet,

  11. I hope it stays like this for a while anyways.  I'm actually nervous posting this on here.  I hope they don't crack down.  Any risk of that?  :lipsrsealed:

    Well there is the roughly end of 30 days speed drop(happens somewhat randomly).  Even Hughesnet(in the States) has been caught pulling it as well. http://www.testmy.net/forum/index.php?topic=26554.msg307263;topicseen#msg307263

    Just keep a note on your speeds for a couple of months and when you might start to get throttled. Since some users on more popular towers do have speed throttles. But it all depends on the bandwidth capacity of the tower.  So if new users get signed up more slowly, you stand a better chance of a tower upgrade before the bandwidth gets over maximum(user bandwidth purchased plans, compared to tower bandwidth available).

  12. I am not sure if it was Comodo, that actually stated on their site that they make the product for corporations and then the lowly home user gets the benefits of the free product.  Or at least thats what it used to be.

    Zone Alarms home version is usually a few minor releases behind the paid version.

  13. Are you fiber to the home or fiber to the node(down the street)?

    I suppose if water got into a fiber optics connection point it could distort(slow) the signal.

    If when it stops raining and two days later the speed comes back to full 24/7, then there is a water leak issue somewhere.

  14. i think but i don't understand why my down speed is so much faster than the up speed. is this normal if not can it be fixed? can anyone help me?

                                        thanks  

    Uploads in the general 800Kbps range compared to download ranges of 2Mbps to 30Mbps speeds.

    I think fiber has a higher upload speeds. And the occasional cable system with really fast speeds can be in the 3Mbps range.

    But unless you are uploading large torrents all day long, no need for high upload speeds, says the ISP's. But then theres Comcrap and them not wanting anyone to do Torrents on their network.

  15. If you modify the default settings on some programs....... Less chance of being infected.  

    Shoot, if my mums computer can run clean for years, I must have set things up right. Even with the grandkids of hers surfing as well. Other than the time the little basssstard download Kazaa for 2 hours and 30 songs. Then deleted it and I had to remove 7 bits of spywares. Theres nothing more fun than doing maintenance one day and coming back two days later to finish and wondering where all the crap came from. But the file folders were still there  :knuppel2:

    I've hit a couple of infected(hacked) sites as of late and they were just an annoyance.  Interesting hacks. a webpage with only one page, had a  page redirect about every 7 page views that went to a webpage with the standard fake scanner scanning you (via JavaScript). And the other one was a tiny bit of hackers code for an I-Frame injection attack(I think it was) that only showed up loading on the first page view, but not if you refreshed the page. But if you went to another site and came back(via address bar), it showed up again.

  16. Batteries are easy to replace. As long as you have one of those larger battery only stores. They sometimes sell solar power units as well.

    I open my UPS's and put a piece of black tape on the speaker, to quiet it about half way for them middle of the night blackouts. Or I could just de-solder it. But that would mean not waking up to shut everything down if I don't have the auto shutdown software installed.  But then again, when the power goes out, it gets so dead quiet, I automatically wake up.  

  17. I killed the SideBar as one of the first things I did to Vista to Fix it to work better.  :twisted:

    My Windows 7 RC is on the new build machine now(off the old tester machine) and it's just so freaking awesome. Fast and no crashes.

×
×
  • Create New...