On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 16:35 +0100, Michael Rueger wrote:
> Ken Causey wrote:
> > First of all, let me apologize in advance for my ignorance. Please
> > provide more information, as I don't follow.
> >
> > 1. 'squeakfoundation server'? By this do you mean the server as a
>
> sorry, squeak.org main page
>
> But, as things go, now I don't get these warnings anymore...
> hmmm....
>
> I'll let you know if I can reproduce this again.
>
> Let's hope it was just a false alarm...
>
> Thanks!
>
> Michael
>
Thank you.
I wonder if this has any relation to the recent proxy server issues that
some people have been having or if it is completely unrelated. Are you
sure it wasn't wiki.squeak.org?
Ken
Hi all,
when going to the squeakfoundation server Kasperski pops up with
Instrusion.Generic.format-string.exploit
warning. This is reproducable.
Any way to check, if something on the server got hacked? Or simply a
hacked .png or so?
Michael
Hi,
I only realised some days ago that Hetzner changed the traffic policy
since a while:
http://www.hetzner.de/rootserver_en.html
Traffic Usage is for free. We will restrict the connection speed to
10 MBit/s if 1000 GB/month are exceeded. You can request an
activation for 250 GB at a time free of charge in your Hetzner
administration interface.
This means we can put with no problem stuff like the CD image and the
Squeak/Smalltalk Videos on ftp.squeak.org.
Marcus
For some time now the standard backlog of qmail requests on the server
has been increasing (it seems to average 2500-3000 or so currently) and
I suspect that at least some portion of this is related to mailing list
subscribers whose addresses no longer work. For some time now most
mailing list notices have been going to this mailing list (I've never
yet figured out why) and I've simply been deleting them from the
moderation queue rather than have everyone flooded by them. But really
the ones that are due to dead subscribers should be handled at some
point. I'm really not sure who or how this has been processed in the
past and I'm wondering if anyone knows or has an opinion on a policy for
this.
For example do I drop someone on the first bounce that seems to indicate
something that won't be quickly fixed? Do I wait for response X or
period of time Y? What about weeks and weeks of transient problems like
full mailbox? I think you get the idea.
Of course I also cannot handle these myself (for the most part) since I
handed off overall mailing list admin duties to Marcus. So somehow he
and I will need to work out an interface for this.
Ken