| Author |
Message |
Owl Jolsen
Guest
|
 Posted:
Sun Oct 02, 2005 8:21 am Post subject:
March 29, 2006 total eclipse - IT admin's WORST NIGHTMARE |
|
|
In less than 6 months, we will be one of several online media companies
webcasting the total solar eclipse from Africa, on 29th March, 2006. This
will be during the working hours in Europe.
For corporate IT admins in Europe, this will be their WORST NIGHTMARE
come to life. We are working on and improving our system in sucha way that
corporate IT admins in Europe will not be able to stop people from watching
the eclipse without shutting down the ENTIRE NETWORK. We will be using a
heavily encrypted feed, so that any IT admins that try to sniff the packets
wont get anything. As somoene said once "The book will be open, but the
pages will all be in an unreadble language".
We will be running an ecnrypted link over port 80. There is NO WAY that
can be shut down without cutting off ALL web access to the network. We are
taking a cue from Kazaa, and P2P services, and are using encrypted links
over port 80, which admins will be unable to stop without shutting down the
entire network.
As far as eclipses go, this will be the longest, as far as totality goes,
since one of our competitors began webcasting eclipses way back in 1997.
Where we plan to he webcasting from, it will be at about 10:45 AM British
Summer Time, 11:45 in Central Europe (Europe goes to Summer Time on Sunday,
26th March).
Basically, people will be watching the eclipse, and gobbling down HUGE
amounts of bandwidth. We plan to offer feeds up to 100K in bitrate, and that
will add up fast. Users will be clogging the network watching the eclipse,
and corporate IT admins will have no CLUE as to what is going in, becusae the
feeds will be encrypted.
The REAL nightmare scenario on this for IT admins, will be in the year
2009, when we will be webcasting a total solar eclipse with 6 minutes and
38 seconds of totality from Shanghai, China, on 22nd July, 2009. For nearly
7 minutes, poeple will be clooging network bandwidth all over Asia, and
becuase it will be encrypted, admins will never know that people are watching
the solar eclipse. It will also being during the workday in Australia, so
Australian admins will also wonder why the bandwidth usage is going so high. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
lorenzodes
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 02, 2005 8:21 am Post subject:
Re: March 29, 2006 total eclipse - IT admin's WORST NIGHTMAR |
|
|
Owl Jolsen wrote on date 02/10/2005 9.11:
| Quote: | Basically, people will be watching the eclipse, and gobbling down HUGE
amounts of bandwidth. We plan to offer feeds up to 100K in bitrate, and that
will add up fast. Users will be clogging the network watching the eclipse,
and corporate IT admins will have no CLUE as to what is going in, becusae the
feeds will be encrypted.
|
ROTFL. It won't work.
--
Formerly known as Loric |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Walter Roberson
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:13 pm Post subject:
Re: March 29, 2006 total eclipse - IT admin's WORST NIGHTMAR |
|
|
In article <20051006170714.14995.qmail@nym.alias.net>,
Owl Jolsen <owljolsen@nym.alias.net> wrote:
: And becuase we will be using an encrypted transmission over port
:80, admins in South America, Europe, and Africa will be unable to
:stop people from watching the eclipse without shutting down the
:ENTIRE network.
Well, it'll be the middle of the night for me, so I won't care,
but I know of several solutions that do not involve
"shutting down the ENTIRE network". But as you seem to enjoy
the prospect of "shutting down the ENTIRE network", you'll have
to excuse if I don't post the solutions, so as not to give you
ideas.
--
These .signatures are sold by volume, and not by weight. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Owl Jolsen
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Oct 06, 2005 10:07 pm Post subject:
Re: March 29, 2006 total eclipse - IT admin's WORST NIGHTMAR |
|
|
"lorenzodes" <lorenzodes.removeme@iol.it> wrote in message news:YIM%e.7128$133.4895@tornado.fastwebnet.it...
| Quote: | Owl Jolsen wrote on date 02/10/2005 9.11:
Basically, people will be watching the eclipse, and gobbling down HUGE
amounts of bandwidth. We plan to offer feeds up to 100K in bitrate, and that
will add up fast. Users will be clogging the network watching the eclipse,
and corporate IT admins will have no CLUE as to what is going in, becusae the
feeds will be encrypted.
ROTFL. It won't work.
|
Oh yes it will. First, the stream will be encrypted, so that
anyone attempting to sniff the packets, will just get a bunch
of indecipherable nonsense. There is no POSSIBLE way that
IT admins in Europe will be able to figure out what is going
on. At the area of greatest eclipse, the totality phase will last
about 4 1/2 minutes. It admins in Europe and Africa, and parts of
South America, where it will be during working hours, will not be
able to figure out what is going on.
And becuase we will be using an encrypted transmission over port
80, admins in South America, Europe, and Africa will be unable to
stop people from watching the eclipse without shutting down the
ENTIRE network. It admins in Asia will have the same problem during
the July 22, 2009 eclipse. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Owl Jolsen
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Oct 07, 2005 2:16 am Post subject:
Re: March 29, 2006 total eclipse - IT admin's WORST NIGHTMAR |
|
|
"Walter Roberson" <roberson@ibd.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca> wrote in message news:di3m09$eu1$1@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca...
| Quote: | In article <20051006170714.14995.qmail@nym.alias.net>,
Owl Jolsen <owljolsen@nym.alias.net> wrote:
: And becuase we will be using an encrypted transmission over port
:80, admins in South America, Europe, and Africa will be unable to
:stop people from watching the eclipse without shutting down the
:ENTIRE network.
Well, it'll be the middle of the night for me, so I won't care,
but I know of several solutions that do not involve
"shutting down the ENTIRE network". But as you seem to enjoy
the prospect of "shutting down the ENTIRE network", you'll have
to excuse if I don't post the solutions, so as not to give you
ideas.
|
What solutions? That way our system is designed to work, there
is no POSSIBLE way to stop it. Plus, the stream will be ENCRYPTED,
meaning that IT admins in Africa, Europe, and parts of South
America will not ANY CLUE as to what will be causing bandwidth
usage to jump for several minutes around 11:30AM British Summer
Time (12:30 European Summer Time) on that particular day.
All that any packet sniffers, such as Snort, will show is that
encrypted transmissions took place. As some said once, "The
book will be open, but the pages will all be in an unreadable
language". We are taking a que from P2p companies that use
port 80, when all other ports fail. There is no POSSIBLE way
IT admins will be able to stop people from watching the
eclipse through our service without cuttting off ALL port
80 accees, meaning that ALL web access would be shut down.
For IT admins in Europe, Africa, and parts of South
America, it will be their WORST NIGHTMARE come to life, when
they find that our coverage of the eclipse CANNOT be blocked.
Our system will run much like P2P service. Each computer that
connects will act as a proxy. With ever changing addresses
on port 80, there is no POSSIBLE way that they will be able
to stop us, without cutting off ALL port 80 and port 443
access. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leythos
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Oct 07, 2005 3:09 am Post subject:
Re: March 29, 2006 total eclipse - IT admin's WORST NIGHTMAR |
|
|
In article <20051006211646.20233.qmail@nym.alias.net>,
owljolsen@nym.alias.net says...
| Quote: | What solutions? That way our system is designed to work, there
is no POSSIBLE way to stop it. Plus, the stream will be ENCRYPTED,
meaning that IT admins in Africa, Europe, and parts of South
America will not ANY CLUE as to what will be causing bandwidth
usage to jump for several minutes around 11:30AM British Summer
Time (12:30 European Summer Time) on that particular day.
|
Any admin worth their salt won't have any problems with this - they will
already be blocking access so that only approved sites are permitted,
only those users that actually need web access get it, and that it's not
any different that any other event.
Your assumption is that the security manager is a idiot or doesn't
understand anything about security.
--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moe Trin
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Oct 08, 2005 1:00 am Post subject:
Re: March 29, 2006 total eclipse - IT admin's WORST NIGHTMAR |
|
|
In the Usenet newsgroup comp.security.firewalls, in article
<di3m09$eu1$1@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca>, Walter Roberson wrote:
| Quote: | In article <20051006170714.14995.qmail@nym.alias.net>,
|
Ah, no wonder I didn't see this.
| Quote: | Owl Jolsen <owljolsen@nym.alias.net> wrote:
: And becuase we will be using an encrypted transmission over port
:80, admins in South America, Europe, and Africa will be unable to
:stop people from watching the eclipse without shutting down the
:ENTIRE network.
Well, it'll be the middle of the night for me, so I won't care,
but I know of several solutions that do not involve
"shutting down the ENTIRE network". But as you seem to enjoy
the prospect of "shutting down the ENTIRE network", you'll have
to excuse if I don't post the solutions, so as not to give you
ideas.
|
Sounds like the same troll who was posting about "IRC-based Olympic
Coverage" last Christmas and "First new figure skating results coverage"
in mid-January in this group. The wording, posting style, and concepts
are similar. Obviously, the troll didn't learn anything in the past nine
months.
Boring!
Old guy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leythos
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Oct 08, 2005 1:14 am Post subject:
Re: March 29, 2006 total eclipse - IT admin's WORST NIGHTMAR |
|
|
In article <slrndkdkv6.1p7.ibuprofin@compton.phx.az.us>,
ibuprofin@painkiller.example.tld says...
| Quote: | Sounds like the same troll who was posting about "IRC-based Olympic
Coverage" last Christmas and "First new figure skating results coverage"
in mid-January in this group. The wording, posting style, and concepts
are similar. Obviously, the troll didn't learn anything in the past nine
months.
|
Yep, it's the same lamer.
--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Charles Newman
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:21 pm Post subject:
Re: March 29, 2006 total eclipse - IT admin's WORST NIGHTMAR |
|
|
X-No-Archive: Yes
"Moe Trin" <ibuprofin@painkiller.example.tld> wrote in message
news:slrndkdkv6.1p7.ibuprofin@compton.phx.az.us...
| Quote: | In the Usenet newsgroup comp.security.firewalls, in article
di3m09$eu1$1@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca>, Walter Roberson wrote:
In article <20051006170714.14995.qmail@nym.alias.net>,
Ah, no wonder I didn't see this.
Owl Jolsen <owljolsen@nym.alias.net> wrote:
: And becuase we will be using an encrypted transmission over port
:80, admins in South America, Europe, and Africa will be unable to
:stop people from watching the eclipse without shutting down the
:ENTIRE network.
Well, it'll be the middle of the night for me, so I won't care,
but I know of several solutions that do not involve
"shutting down the ENTIRE network". But as you seem to enjoy
the prospect of "shutting down the ENTIRE network", you'll have
to excuse if I don't post the solutions, so as not to give you
ideas.
Sounds like the same troll who was posting about "IRC-based Olympic
Coverage" last Christmas and "First new figure skating results coverage"
in mid-January in this group. The wording, posting style, and concepts
are similar. Obviously, the troll didn't learn anything in the past nine
months.
|
I think as far as figure skating goes, they might not be just blowing hot
air. The United Skating Figure Skating Assn has inked a contract with
one company to provide secure and encrypted broadband access to
figure skating events under USFSA control, for an annual subscrption
fee of $300, or for $5 if you want to buy by the event.
This sounds like a subsidiary of thhis guy's company, and something they
just
might try. If it is a subsdiary of this guy's company, it appears
they just might pull off what they have been talking about here.
If they really are going to provide encrypted subscription
video access, via broadband, of figure skating events, it will
be that much harder to stop. With encrypted packets,
someone may well be able to sneak on and watch from
work, without the boss knowing about it. It appears that the
"worst nightmare" scenario of IT admins not being able to
stop it may very well take place.
This is one reason why, it I were a corporate IT admin, I would
get rid of any hardware firewalls the company was using, and
put my software-based firewall on the company network. It
would be able to stop this guy's stuff, where the hardware firewalls
could not. The is what he apparently cannot understand. Hardware
appliances do not have the flexibility to stop it, but my software based
system does. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moe Trin
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:05 am Post subject:
Re: March 29, 2006 total eclipse - IT admin's WORST NIGHTMAR |
|
|
In the Usenet newsgroup comp.security.firewalls, in article
<muCdnTDqZsYhKtreRVn-iw@comcast.com>, Charles Newman wrote:
| Quote: | I think as far as figure skating goes, they might not be just blowing hot
air. The United Skating Figure Skating Assn has inked a contract with
one company to provide secure and encrypted broadband access to
figure skating events under USFSA control, for an annual subscrption
fee of $300, or for $5 if you want to buy by the event.
|
Which was completely different from what the troll was proposing back
in January.
| Quote: | This sounds like a subsidiary of thhis guy's company, and something they
just might try.
|
No, this is just a clueless troll
| Quote: | If they really are going to provide encrypted subscription
video access, via broadband, of figure skating events, it will
be that much harder to stop.
|
Still haven't bothered to learn about basic network concepts, huh?
| Quote: | With encrypted packets, someone may well be able to sneak on and watch
from work, without the boss knowing about it. It appears that the
"worst nightmare" scenario of IT admins not being able to stop it may
very well take place.
|
That's only through your lack of knowledge of networking. Actually it's
absolutely _trivial_ to detect, and _very_ easy to stop - in quite a
number of ways. Just because you can't imagine how it's possible doesn't
mean that every firewall admin is equally lacking.
| Quote: | This is one reason why, it I were a corporate IT admin
|
But you are not - you're not even in IT, because you lack the knowledge
and refuse to learn anything about it. Why should anyone take your advice
when it has been proven on many cases that you don't understand even the
fundamental concepts. Sure, your bean counter instructor taught ONE
microsoft class, but you already know that microsoft has lied to you in
that class, as has been pointed out on numerous occasions.
| Quote: | Hardware appliances do not have the flexibility to stop it, but my
software based system does.
|
Charles, that was proven to be false - and you just can't imagine how
all of your "network knowledge" could be so wrong.
Have you gotten a version of *nix installed yet? Remember, even microsoft
is going to transition there, and your limited knowledge is going to be
more useless until you learn it. Hmmm, you could even look at the built-in
firewall and see one blatantly obvious trick that would block this trolls
imaginary service at the perimeter firewall, but your toy firewall never
heard of it. Wonder why.
Old guy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Charles Newman
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 09, 2005 3:27 am Post subject:
Re: March 29, 2006 total eclipse - IT admin's WORST NIGHTMAR |
|
|
X-No-Archive: Yes
"Moe Trin" <ibuprofin@painkiller.example.tld> wrote in message
news:slrndkgd57.gi2.ibuprofin@compton.phx.az.us...
| Quote: | In the Usenet newsgroup comp.security.firewalls, in article
muCdnTDqZsYhKtreRVn-iw@comcast.com>, Charles Newman wrote:
I think as far as figure skating goes, they might not be just blowing hot
air. The United Skating Figure Skating Assn has inked a contract with
one company to provide secure and encrypted broadband access to
figure skating events under USFSA control, for an annual subscrption
fee of $300, or for $5 if you want to buy by the event.
Which was completely different from what the troll was proposing back
in January.
|
Well, this sounds like something this guy, and his engineers would try.
If MediaZone really is a subsdiary of this guy's company, they just might
well pull it off. Given that the transmissions are going to be encrypted,
and
he talked on here about encrypted transmissions, this just might be a
subsdiary of his company.
From what I gather, MediaZone inked a contract with the USFSA to
webcast all the events under their direct control. If this is a subsidiary
of this guy's company, as I suspect it may well be, IT admins may well
be in for some serious trouble. If the packets are encrypted, it would
be that much harder to gather evidence to use inappropriate internet
use as a reason to fire someone. That would have to come up with
another reason, such as to tell them they are being downsized. That
is the most common reason cited. It allows a company to get rid of
an unwanted employee without having to say anything to any future
employers that call up for a reference. You could still fire someone,
but you would have to come up with another reason. Using
downsizing as a reason saves the company from finding itself
having to fight a wrongful termination lawsuit in court. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leythos
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 09, 2005 3:45 am Post subject:
Re: March 29, 2006 total eclipse - IT admin's WORST NIGHTMAR |
|
|
In article <muCdnTDqZsYhKtreRVn-iw@comcast.com>, charlesnewman1
@comcast.spamkiller.net says...
| Quote: | This is one reason why, it I were a corporate IT admin, I would
get rid of any hardware firewalls the company was using, and
put my software-based firewall on the company network. It
would be able to stop this guy's stuff, where the hardware firewalls
could not. The is what he apparently cannot understand. Hardware
appliances do not have the flexibility to stop it, but my software based
system does.
|
And you are a complete idiot - a hardware firewall will stop it, and
even block it, if the firewall is setup properly.
--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moe Trin
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 09, 2005 6:50 am Post subject:
Re: March 29, 2006 total eclipse - IT admin's WORST NIGHTMAR |
|
|
In the Usenet newsgroup comp.security.firewalls, in article
<g_idnbomjep52tXeRVn-sw@comcast.com>, Charles Newman wrote:
| Quote: | Well, this sounds like something this guy, and his engineers would try.
If MediaZone really is a subsdiary of this guy's company, they just might
well pull it off.
|
And you expect a company like MediaZone to be using clueless trolls
posting from anonymous relays (or like the posts in December and January,
through cracked windoze boxes) everywhere except California. That makes
sense to you I'm sure. I suppose you also expect CCH to be flogging
their services from anonymous servers, and you buy pharmaceuticals from
the same sources.
| Quote: | Given that the transmissions are going to be encrypted, and he talked on
here about encrypted transmissions, this just might be a subsdiary of his
company
|
That's stretching pretty far, isn't it? Or have you subscribed and are
hoping it's not fake. If you paid by credit card and can dispute the
charge.
| Quote: | From what I gather, MediaZone inked a contract with the USFSA to
webcast all the events under their direct control.
|
Try using google - It's remotely possibly you might learn something.
| Quote: | If this is a subsidiary of this guy's company, as I suspect it may well be,
|
What evidence do you think you have that this might be possible? By the
way - make up your mind which is a subsidiary of which.
| Quote: | IT admins may well be in for some serious trouble. If the packets are
encrypted, it would be that much harder to gather evidence to use
inappropriate internet use as a reason to fire someone.
|
See, that's another reason you'd never make it in IT. You obviously
know nothing about computers, never mind networking. You might want
to check the 'alt.folklore.urban' newsgroup - there's a pretty
apropos thread that might even hint a solution to you. But then again,
it _is_ technical, even if it probably is fake.
| Quote: | That would have to come up with another reason, such as to tell them
they are being downsized. That is the most common reason cited. It
allows a company to get rid of an unwanted employee without having to
say anything to any future employers that call up for a reference.
|
Is that what you were taught by your bean counter instructor? Here's
a free clue - consult a lawyer before you try that, lest the state
of California Department of Industrial Relations comes down on your
a$$. Think I'm joking? Ask a rather large chain of stores with a
California headquarters near the Oakland/Bay bridge about that. (Can't
believe they were _that_ stupid.)
Old guy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Walter Roberson
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Oct 10, 2005 11:58 pm Post subject:
Re: March 29, 2006 total eclipse - IT admin's WORST NIGHTMAR |
|
|
In article <YbydnZTnzqU1ZtfeRVn-qw@comcast.com>,
Charles Newman <charlesnewman1@comcast.spamkiller.net> wrote:
| Quote: | "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:uLC2f.31129$tD4.28815@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
|
:> All you have to do is show that someone is using the network for non-
:> company related actions/reasons, that it's clearly against the company
:> policy, and they can be fired on the spot - even without a warning.
:But you have to have the actual content of what they viewed or
:downloaded, in order to show they used the network for non
:business reasons. If you dont have the actual content, you had
:better tread lightly on it. That is what I was taught in business
:law class once.
The effective rules in the US have changed through various court rulings
since your classes. What is needed now for non-government situations
is evidence that a written policy existed, evidence that they were
directed to read the policy and agree to it, and evidence that they
contravened the policy. The actual content is not important if you
have (say) firewall logs showing that they went to sites that were
against policy, or that they emailed their spouse when personal
email is prohibitted.
The reason for the emphasis on content is now not the content itself but
rather to directly tie the content to the computer, and then the
usage to that one person -- but any sufficiently robust method of tying
firewall logs to individuals would be accepted. One of the reasons
for mandatory password changes is to reduce the strength of the
argument that "someone must have stolen my password!"
--
Goedel's Mail Filter Incompleteness Theorem:
In any sufficiently expressive language, with any fixed set of
email filtering algorithms, there exists at least one spam message
which the algorithms are unable to filter out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Walter Roberson
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Oct 11, 2005 12:24 am Post subject:
Re: March 29, 2006 total eclipse - IT admin's WORST NIGHTMAR |
|
|
In article <20051010225903.16559.qmail@nym.alias.net>,
Owl Jolsen <owljolsen@nym.alias.net> wrote:
: Also, as far as anything going on in Europe, partcularly the
:29th March solar eclipse in Africa goes, a lot of cell phones in
:Europe now have high-speed internet access built-in. Someone who
:REALLY wanted to sneak on from work could unplug from the company
:LAN, and plug their office PC into their cell phone,
I know within minutes when someone unplugs from our company LAN.
I could know within seconds if I wanted to bother.
:and sign on that
:way. short of using an illegal cell phone jammer, there is no POSSIBLE
:way they could detect or stop THAT, because all the traffic would
:be going through their cellular provider, and nothing would show up
:in the company logs.
"Illegal" cell phone jammer?? If I thought I had a good reason to put
in a cell phone jammer, our national police force would be the ones
who would come and install it for us!
--
"No one has the right to destroy another person's belief by
demanding empirical evidence." -- Ann Landers |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in