similar to: Linux TCP flaw

On 12/08/16 17:56, Barry Brimer wrote: >> [root at vps ~]# uname -r >> 2.6.32-042stab108.7 > > Not needed. This affects 3.6+ kernels. You don't have one of those. It affects RHEL6 which runs 2.6.32, they backported the features that it affects. If the above openvz kernel was based on a RHEL6 kernel (and I'd guess it was) then it's affected. Peter

On 08/11/2016 11:07 PM, Barry Brimer wrote: > > On Fri, 12 Aug 2016, Peter wrote: > >> On 12/08/16 17:56, Barry Brimer wrote: >>>> [root at vps ~]# uname -r >>>> 2.6.32-042stab108.7 >>> >>> Not needed. This affects 3.6+ kernels. You don't have one of those. >> >> It affects RHEL6 which runs 2.6.32, they backported the

Thanks for the info Peter. The VPS is running on a Plesk environment. ------ Original Message ------ From: "Peter" <peter at pajamian.dhs.org> To: centos at centos.org Sent: 12/08/2016 3:36:32 PM Subject: Re: [CentOS] Linux TCP flaw >On 12/08/16 17:33, Andrew Dent wrote: >> So after reading this, felt I should apply the fix to a CentOS6 VPS >>that >> I

> Hi > > So after reading this, felt I should apply the fix to a CentOS6 VPS that I > have. > http://www.zdnet.com/article/linux-tcp-flaw-lets-anyone-hijack-internet-traffic/ > > The article doesn't talk about CentOS or Redhat, but I assume the problem is > the same, and hoping the solution is the same. > However that doesn't seem to be the case. > >

On Fri, 12 Aug 2016, Peter wrote: > On 12/08/16 17:56, Barry Brimer wrote: >>> [root at vps ~]# uname -r >>> 2.6.32-042stab108.7 >> >> Not needed. This affects 3.6+ kernels. You don't have one of those. > > It affects RHEL6 which runs 2.6.32, they backported the features that it > affects. If the above openvz kernel was based on a RHEL6 kernel (and

Would a successful attack on the IP address of a VPS in a Plesk environment expose the VPS, the Virtual Host or both (and all other VPSs)? ------ Original Message ------ From: "Johnny Hughes" <johnny at centos.org> To: centos at centos.org Sent: 12/08/2016 9:08:23 PM Subject: Re: [CentOS] Linux TCP flaw >On 08/12/2016 05:58 AM, Andrew Dent wrote: >> Thanks for the

> Am 01.08.2020 um 23:52 schrieb Leon Fauster via CentOS <centos at centos.org>: > > ?Am 01.08.20 um 23:41 schrieb Kay Schenk: >> Well misery loves company but still...just truly unfathomable! >> Time for a change. > > > I can only express my incomprehension for such statements! > > Stay and help. Instead running away or should I say out of the >

Samba digest 1966, Jeremy Allison wrote: > For people who are looking for some objective > numbers to help recommend Samba to their employers (I > know there are some of you on this list :-) you might > want to look at the following couple of articles. > > The first one is in Smart Reseller (a USA trade press > magazine) at : > >

eWeek reviewed Samba 2.2 at : http://www.zdnet.com/eweek/stories/general/0,11011,2712294,00.html - they seem to like it ! It's certainly encouraging to get trade coverage like this, I'm hoping the more people who report Samba use in their organisation to press outlets will encourage them to cover more Open Source/Free Software products ! Cheers, Jeremy Allison, Samba Team. --

Link here http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-318208.html Will H264 become web standard in the future?

Link here http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-318208.html Will H264 become web standard in the future?

This is an article I came across on zdnet.com. You may or may not agree with it. Personally, I don't. Anyway, here's the link to it. I thought some of you might want to read it, and form your own opinion. http://blogs.zdnet.com/Murphy/?p=769 Thanks for the help on the wireless problem. Jim

Hi all, For people who are looking for some objective numbers to help recommend Samba to their employers (I know there are some of you on this list :-) you might want to look at the following couple of articles. The first one is in Smart Reseller (a USA trade press magazine) at : http://www.zdnet.com/sr/stories/issue/0,4537,2196106,00.html titled : "The Best Windows File Server:

Hello all. Does anybody have experience with pushing CentOS in enterprise? I have the following situation. I tried to promote CentOS to local bank. They have now a couple of Gentoo-based systems and I tried to explain them that CentOS is much better option for enterprises. IT department is interested in stability of the system, so they are ready to give CentOS a try. But the problem came from

Hi, there. While waiting for the encoder RC1, I will report some minor problems I experienced with Peter's Winamp decoder. First, I am using Nullsoft Vorbis Decoder v.1.11a with Winamp v.2.76 on Windows 98 SE. 1. When the buttons of Playlist Editor are extended, the part extended in playlist screen seems to be flickering when an Ogg file is being played. 2. I check the option of

Have a look: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/19982.html Any predictions? Matt --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'vorbis-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list

Questions re this statement in the ZDNET article -- "In all cases, users reported that downgrading systems to a previous release to reverse the BootHole patches usually fixed their problems." A previous release of what? GRUB2 So that's my first question. Second. I'm assuming the the muti-screen UEFI settings I see are standard for more recent BIOS -- not sure of version. Do

Il 02/08/20 00:42, Mike McCarthy, W1NR ha scritto: > It appears that it is affecting multiple distributions including Debian > and Ubuntu so it looks like the grub2 team messed up. See > > https://www.zdnet.com/article/boothole-fixes-causing-boot-problems-across-multiple-linux-distros/ > > Mike > > On 8/1/2020 6:11 PM, Marc Balmer via CentOS wrote: >> >>> Am

Hi ALL, I want to setup Transpaent Proxy on the box running iptables Firewall. With iptables, I have given below rules. iptables -F INPUT iptables -F OUTPUT iptables -F FORWARD iptables -F -t nat iptables -F -t mangle #Enabling ip forwarding echo "1" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward #enable syn cookies (prevent against the common 'syn flood attack') echo "1"

Hi ! I''ve a router linux with 3 eths in order to share internet connection: 1:lo 2:eth0-> Internet Connection (DHCP) 3:eth1-> gateway wired hosts -> 192.168.101.254 4:eth2-> gateway wireless hosts -> 192.168.212.254 / 192.168.230.254 / 192.168.210.254 / ... eth2 haves diferents IP Aliasings because it connect to a switch which connect 4 access points (linksys), each