wcLEX - New NNTP Proxy for MS Forums
in [MFC]
|
Prev: RS232 Interface - Serial Port - VS2008, C++
Next: wcLEX - New NNTP Proxy for MS Forums - crashes
From: Hector Santos on 8 Jun 2010 16:14 My apology Cholo. This is my first .NET production and wasn't all aware of its default .net 4.0 perquisites and all the options to find in the Setup Deployment to get it all matched. I got it worked out now with v1.0d which only requires .NET 3.5 SP1 and Windows Live ID (part of the install). Download the current version at: http://opensite.winserver.com -- HLS Cholo Lennon wrote: > On 06/06/2010 19:35, Hector Santos wrote: >> Before you get cut off from the Microsoft News groups ......... >> >> SSI is please announce wcLEX - Wildcat! Live Exchange!, a free NNTP >> Proxy Server for the Microsoft Web-based Mail Support Forums. >> >> With wcLEX, Microsoft Users and Developers can continue to enjoy using >> their News Reader for accessing the new mail groups. >> >> You can download wcLEX 1.0a pre-release version from here: >> >> http://opensite.winserver.com/wclex/wclex-1-0a-setup.msi >> http://opensite.winserver.com/wclex/wclex-1-0a-setup.zip >> >> Please use this support newsgroup >> >> news://opensite.winserver.com >> >> to report any issues or to make suggestions. >> >> My plan is to make wcLEX a full "Social and Integrated" support package >> for Microsoft Developers. Support and participating in support shouldn't >> be hard for people and you shouldn't have to always have to use the web >> site t > > Which version of .Net does it use? The program hangs up at startup. I > have a PC with Win XP SP3 + VS 2005 professional. > > Regards > > -- HLS
From: Hector Santos on 8 Jun 2010 16:16 Konrad, I'll add this to my TO-DO list to see if I can alter the web services for this. -- HLS Konrad Kullig wrote: > Hi, > > how can I connect Wildcat! to my local web proxy? > Where can I specify IP-address and port of my local web proxy? > > Regards > Konrad > > > "Cholo Lennon" <chololennon(a)hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag > news:u422SywBLHA.5476(a)TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >> On 08/06/2010 09:59, Konrad Kullig wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> unfortunetly when signing in I get a network error. We use a web proxy on >>> a >>> different port which needs authentification. >>> How can I solve this? >>> >>> Regards >>> Konrad >>> >> What kind of proxy do you have? ISA server? in this case you could use >> NTLMaps (a freeware python authorization proxy server): >> >> Your App --[no authentication]--> NTLM --[authentication]--> ISA server >> >> http://ntlmaps.sourceforge.net/ >> >> In my case, NTLMaps is an essential tool for my Linux machines and mobile >> devices. >> >> >> Regards >> >> -- >> Cholo Lennon >> Bs.As. >> ARG >> >> >> >>> "Hector Santos"<sant9442(a)nospam.gmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag >>> news:O0Y4RicBLHA.1888(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>>> Before you get cut off from the Microsoft News groups ......... >>>> >>>> SSI is please announce wcLEX - Wildcat! Live Exchange!, a free NNTP >>>> Proxy >>>> Server for the Microsoft Web-based Mail Support Forums. >>>> >>>> With wcLEX, Microsoft Users and Developers can continue to enjoy using >>>> their News Reader for accessing the new mail groups. >>>> >>>> You can download wcLEX 1.0a pre-release version from here: >>>> >>>> http://opensite.winserver.com/wclex/wclex-1-0a-setup.msi >>>> http://opensite.winserver.com/wclex/wclex-1-0a-setup.zip >>>> >>>> Please use this support newsgroup >>>> >>>> news://opensite.winserver.com >>>> >>>> to report any issues or to make suggestions. >>>> >>>> My plan is to make wcLEX a full "Social and Integrated" support package >>>> for Microsoft Developers. Support and participating in support >>>> shouldn't >>>> be hard for people and you shouldn't have to always have to use the web >>>> site to do. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Hector Santos >>>> http://www.santronics.com >>> > > -- HLS
From: Joseph M. Newcomer on 8 Jun 2010 19:05 But this means I will have to make a backup of the VM essentially every time I potentially go to a new, untrustedb (that is, any) site. So how many hundreds of VM copies can I live with? I don't want to lose valid work (and valid emails, and valid downloads, and valid...etc.) if I have corruption, and right now my incremental backup allows me to restore to any known point, so I'm no further ahead with a VM than I am right now. The VM will probably happen if the current email machine dies, but until then it isn't worth the additional work. The problem is that there is no way to know, if a piece of malware is installed, *when* it is installed, so the VM solution isn't going to help me restore to a "clean" point if I don't know where my last "clean" point is (which is a problem already, so the VM doesn't change it at all!) Suppose my VM was corrupted last Tuesday. I don't discover it until today. I lose a week's worth of emails, NG posts, etc. to restore the entire VM. Right now, I can detect what files were changed and backed up, so I actualy have a better audit trail now than I could just using a VM. It gives me no isolation that I haven't got already, but a poorer restoration mechanism. If it really solved a problem more effectively, I'd jump at it, but itn doesn't change anything, and some things justn get worse. In fact, I can't even upgrade my existing VMWare, because if I do, all my existing VMs are unusable. Not exactly a robust product in that regard, since there seems to be no "upgrade" path that takes older VMs that are saved and allows them to be lauched in the new version! joe **** On Tue, 08 Jun 2010 19:38:16 +0200, Giovanni Dicanio <giovanniDOTdicanio(a)REMOVEMEgmail.com> wrote: >On 08/06/2010 19:03, Joseph M. Newcomer wrote: > >> I really don't want to have to deal with the security issues, and a VM is just a >> vulnerable as a real machine. And if my VM gets corrupted, I have to be able to restore >> it to a clean state, so I haven't won anything. > >Hmm... I'm not sure, I mean: you can just have a copy of a "clean state >VM" (it's just a file or two on the hard-disk), and if you have a >corruption, you just delete the corrupted VM files and restore the old one. >This is one of the advantages of VMs over real hardware :) > >Giovanni > Joseph M. Newcomer [MVP] email: newcomer(a)flounder.com Web: http://www.flounder.com MVP Tips: http://www.flounder.com/mvp_tips.htm
From: Joseph M. Newcomer on 8 Jun 2010 19:06 But I'd have to make hundreds of snapshots. Not worth the effort. I can track changes in the current machine as readily. joe On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 14:00:23 -0400, "Pete Delgado" <Peter.Delgado(a)NoSpam.com> wrote: > >"Joseph M. Newcomer" <newcomer(a)flounder.com> wrote in message >news:1sts06lel9g5t77aoc2bgmrc6pt053t3qm(a)4ax.com... >>I really don't want to have to deal with the security issues, and a VM is >>just a >> vulnerable as a real machine. >>And if my VM gets corrupted, I have to be able to restore >> it to a clean state, so I haven't won anything. > >Most VM solutions have a feature called "snapshots" which allow you to save >configurations at points in time. For example, for my product testing we >start with clean VMs of all supported operating systems and then add the >desired software in order to be able to perform the tests using actual >"real-world" customer environments. It takes seconds to revert a particular >environment back to the clean "snapshot". This allows us to work more >efficiently than having to manually install or use a product like ghost to >install directly onto the physical machine. > >If you have the available disk space, this solution works nicely. With 1.5TB >hard drives under $100 at NewEgg, disk space is very cheap nowadays. > >As far as VMs being vulnerable, they are just as vulnerable as physical >machines, but at least if you are simply using the VM to access the internet >and not file sharing, you can easily control and limit any infection to the >particular node. > > >>Overall, it doesn't give me anything that >> using a separate machine doesn't already give me (which is my current >> solution) but >> ultimately, the best security is not allowing unconstrained code to run on >> the client >> machine. > >It allows you access to sites and code that you do not have access to with >your current configuration. Whether it is worth the additional hassle to you >is debatable... > >-Pete > Joseph M. Newcomer [MVP] email: newcomer(a)flounder.com Web: http://www.flounder.com MVP Tips: http://www.flounder.com/mvp_tips.htm
From: Joseph M. Newcomer on 8 Jun 2010 19:19
The reason Linices are usually safe is nobody cares about attacking them, and besides, they are so vulnerable by other means that malware attacks are much simpler than on Windows. Besides, I spent 15 years despising Unix, it is not clear why I would voluntarily choose to use it... joe On Tue, 08 Jun 2010 21:22:33 +0200, Hans-J. Ude <news(a)s237965939.online.de> wrote: >Joseph M. Newcomer schrieb: > >>I really don't want to have to deal with the security issues, and a VM is just a >>vulnerable as a real machine. And if my VM gets corrupted, I have to be able to restore >>it to a clean state, so I haven't won anything. Overall, it doesn't give me anything that >>using a separate machine doesn't already give me (which is my current solution) but >>ultimately, the best security is not allowing unconstrained code to run on the client >>machine. > >Or just take one of these Linux trial boot CDs. Ubuntu 10 is doing a >good job here. If you want it runs out of the box with firefox >webbrowser, ftp, anything. I've just tried it out to verify what I'm >talking about, it runs even without a HD attached. I know you dont >like Linux, you deliberately refer to it as "linux" but c'm on... No >joke. > >Hans Joseph M. Newcomer [MVP] email: newcomer(a)flounder.com Web: http://www.flounder.com MVP Tips: http://www.flounder.com/mvp_tips.htm |