[9fans] is sources unreachable?

[9fans] is sources unreachable?

[lucio]

I get (from 196.30.44.139 or so):

	term% 9fs sources
	post...
	post...
	srv tcp!sources.cs.bell-labs.com!9fs: mount failed: Hangup

which has certainly worked well until recently.

++L

Re: [9fans] is sources unreachable?

[Jim Choate]

On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 lucio@proxima.alt.za wrote:

> I get (from 196.30.44.139 or so):
>
> 	term% 9fs sources
> 	post...
> 	post...
> 	srv tcp!sources.cs.bell-labs.com!9fs: mount failed: Hangup
>
> which has certainly worked well until recently.

This has been going on for nearly a week. I'm averaging about 5 attempts
to each connect.

I figured it was a time out of some sort due to increased traffic because
of sobig.

 -- --
      ravage@ssz.com                            jchoate@open-forge.com
      www.ssz.com                               www.open-forge.com

Re: [9fans] is sources unreachable?

[lucio]

Thanks.  It was OK recently, I just don't recall how recent, probably
over the weekend.

++L

Re: [9fans] is sources unreachable?

[Jim Choate]

On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 lucio@proxima.alt.za wrote:

> Thanks.  It was OK recently, I just don't recall how recent, probably
> over the weekend.

It's very intermittent, I got a clean pull first try Sunday afternoon very
late after over a dozen attempts during the day. Hang in there and keep
trying.

 -- --
      ravage@ssz.com                            jchoate@open-forge.com
      www.ssz.com                               www.open-forge.com

Re: [9fans] is sources unreachable?

[northern snowfall]

>
>
>I figured it was a time out of some sort due to increased traffic because
>of sobig.
>
Yeh. SoBig, LOVESAN, etc. Routes have been changing
dramatically for the past week, so some people will
perceive things as down while others wont. Things
should be back to normal pretty soon.

Don

http://www.7f.no-ip.com/~north_

Re: [9fans] is sources unreachable?

[David Presotto]

No, the fossil serving the sources crashed.  I've rebooted while we try to figure out
what broke.

Re: [9fans] is sources unreachable?

[northern snowfall]

>
>
>No, the fossil serving the sources crashed.  I've rebooted while we try to figure out
>what broke.
>
It may have crashed lately, but people have been complaining
about reaching sources for the past week. So, unless it's been
crashed for a week (yet still randomly is able to server users)
I'll still attribute the brunt of the trouble to the worms.

Just the other day a friend of mine and I noticed that network
connections from his UK machine to other UK machines
were being routed through the US and Canada, whereas
they previously had not.

Don

http://www.7f.no-ip.com/~north_

Re: [9fans] is sources unreachable?

[David Presotto]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 981 bytes --]

You are right, sources was up last time I updated something which was Monday
afternoon.  If people have been having problems for a week, it was probably
something else.  Two weeks ago it was the power grid.

This was indeed the worst infection I've seen.  The Plan9/Linux/BSDers got
to look really smug while helping people disinfect their µsoft machines.

I found the worm quite helpful.  It pinpointed every machine that wasn't
keeping up with windows critical updates and/or mcafee .dat's without really
doing any permanent harm (I hope).  A lot of those systems were infected
with a bunch of other viruses that noone was noticing because they were
latent or just not noisey enough.  It'll cause a change in tools/precedures
to keep everyone's system updated.

Of course, you have to count that against the man hours it sonsumed, which was
sizable.  Also, it doesn't seem to be affecting anyone's attitude towards
depending so heavily on one very vulnerable OS.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 2742 bytes --]

From: northern snowfall <dbailey27@ameritech.net>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] is sources unreachable?
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 09:06:56 -0500
Message-ID: <3F4CBB00.6060103@ameritech.net>

>
>
>No, the fossil serving the sources crashed.  I've rebooted while we try to figure out
>what broke.
>
It may have crashed lately, but people have been complaining
about reaching sources for the past week. So, unless it's been
crashed for a week (yet still randomly is able to server users)
I'll still attribute the brunt of the trouble to the worms.

Just the other day a friend of mine and I noticed that network
connections from his UK machine to other UK machines
were being routed through the US and Canada, whereas
they previously had not.

Don

http://www.7f.no-ip.com/~north_

Re: [9fans] is sources unreachable?

[ron minnich]

On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, David Presotto wrote:

> Of course, you have to count that against the man hours it sonsumed, which was
> sizable.  Also, it doesn't seem to be affecting anyone's attitude towards
> depending so heavily on one very vulnerable OS.

yes, it's odd, but people equate "computers" with that OS. As in,
"computers get viruses like this and that's the way it is". They have
trouble understanding that, in fact, that's the way it is for that
vulnerable OS.

Too bad.

ron

Re: [9fans] is sources unreachable?

[northern snowfall]

>
>
>yes, it's odd, but people equate "computers" with that OS. As in,
>"computers get viruses like this and that's the way it is". They have
>trouble understanding that, in fact, that's the way it is for that
>vulnerable OS.
>
Yeh. It really puts one's concept of society in perspective when Microsoft
wins the multi billion dollar bid of providing Homeland Security dept. with
servers and workstations. Not to mention the ramifications of SCADA being
ran by vulnerable MS systems.

IIRC, the latter was thought to be one of the reasons why the LSD guys
targeted DCOM.

Don

http://www.7f.no-ip.com/~north_

Re: [9fans] is sources unreachable?

[matt]

> IIRC, the latter was thought to be one of the reasons why the LSD guys
> targeted DCOM.


presumably you've heard the speculation that SoBig is an experiment in
seeing if 6 degrees of separation will find sensitive systems

Re: [9fans] is sources unreachable?

[northern snowfall]

> presumably you've heard the speculation that SoBig is an experiment in
> seeing if 6 degrees of separation will find sensitive systems


Hmm, I don't remember asking for six degrees of flame.

If you think of something a bit hotter, let me know.

Don

http://www.7f.no-ip.com/~north_



>

Re: [9fans] is sources unreachable?

[matt]

northern snowfall wrote:

>> presumably you've heard the speculation that SoBig is an experiment
>> in seeing if 6 degrees of separation will find sensitive systems
>
>
>
> Hmm, I don't remember asking for six degrees of flame.


Don, you have managed to mis-understand me in a way I can't even work out.

Believe me, if I was flaming you, there would be no doubt.

And also believe me that flaming you is the last thing on my mind.



My statement re: 6 degrees was that you send out an email virus that
spreads itself using *your* contacts, then their contacts, then their
contacts. Then all the infected hosts call in to the 20 servers and
report in about where they are or send an email that makes it's way back
to the originator.
This spread can jump firewalls, POP proxies, heck, even disconnected
networks that get their email through dialup could be affected. It is a
great way of collecting potential usernames for dictionary / lame
password attacks or just email address harvesting. It is one of the most
interesting applications this year, and we've not seen the best of it
yet. It doesn't even exploit bugs !

Re: [9fans] is sources unreachable?

[northern snowfall]

> And also believe me that flaming you is the last thing on my mind.


Lol, first of all I was just making a cocky joke. Second of all, I
understood
what you meant. Third of all, I thought you would have gotten the parallel
to the "misunderstanding" on freenode.

Relax,
Don

http://www.7f.no-ip.com/~north_


>

Re: [9fans] is sources unreachable?

[matt]

northern snowfall wrote:

>> And also believe me that flaming you is the last thing on my mind.
>
>
>
> Lol, first of all I was just making a cocky joke. Second of all, I
> understood
> what you meant. Third of all, I thought you would have gotten the
> parallel
> to the "misunderstanding" on freenode.


HAHA I have been trolled by f2f

> Relax,


sweet

>
> Don


coming back to waste some time?

There is quite a bit of conversation now (same old crap though A sucks,
B sucks, C sucks less etc.,  nobody mention gcc

Re: [9fans] is sources unreachable?

[northern snowfall]

> HAHA I have been trolled by f2f


(-:

> coming back to waste some time?

Meh, prob some time. I waste enough time with one console on
EFnet.

Don

http://www.7f.no-ip.com/~north_

Re: [9fans] is sources unreachable?

[Wes Kussmaul]

> Also, it doesn't seem to be affecting anyone's attitude towards
> depending so heavily on one very vulnerable OS.

Don't count on that. The seed is well planted but it takes time to
germinate.