True phone conversation ..
True phone conversation at about 17.30 today (24/8/13)... ring ring...ring ring ... pickup and answer. "This is Jason from Microsoft technical department. I am calling you to inform you that your internet connection will be cancelled as from tonite .. " Response, in throaty voice - as I got a sore throat : "Oh really, did you know Mr Balmer resigned? Your boss resigned - he quit his job!!... What happened? Mr Balmer resigned as boss of Microsoft!! May be YOU will lose your internet connection?.. Do you know?? .." ............................................................... long silence, voices in the background ...then "This is what I have been told to notify you.." ... Jason hanged up!! Wonder if Jason got shit scared he will lose his job??? !!! Disclaimer: No connection intended with to Jason's on this list. This is purely coincindetal. Daniel
On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 06:02:59PM +1000, Daniel Jitnah wrote: ...
Disclaimer: No connection intended with to Jason's on this list. This is purely coincindetal.
Daniel
As per a previous thread, the above should read: "Disclaimer: No connection intended with to Jasons on this list. This is purely coincindetal." The plural of Jason is Jasons. No apostrophe needed. Cheers ... Duncan. -- Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
Daniel Jitnah wrote:
True phone conversation at about 17.30 today (24/8/13)... "This is Jason from Microsoft technical department. I am calling you to inform you that your internet connection will be cancelled as from tonite .. "
In case it's not obvious, this was probably a fishing attack. If you had said "OMG really? Oh no!" he would have move to phase two: convincing you to install a remote viewing server on your Windows box, so he can turn it into a zombie or pull your bank details or whatever.
On 25/08/13 15:10, Trent W. Buck wrote:
Daniel Jitnah wrote:
True phone conversation at about 17.30 today (24/8/13)... "This is Jason from Microsoft technical department. I am calling you to inform you that your internet connection will be cancelled as from tonite .. " In case it's not obvious, this was probably a fishing attack.
If you had said "OMG really? Oh no!" he would have move to phase two: convincing you to install a remote viewing server on your Windows box, so he can turn it into a zombie or pull your bank details or whatever. Yes, I actually have a video screen capture of an actual attack session which I recorded a while back in a XP Virtualbox snapshot VM made specially for the purpose.!! Its about 1/2 hr long, through a lot of it nothing happens while "Jason" goes on and on about how my PC is infected and I am doomed etc. Pity it has no audio. When I have time I will edit and make it viewable in say 5-10 mins, with comments or voice over.
BTW for those who were at the July Beginners, when I talked about that and there rest.... the website they lead you to, and which I was talking about is "dial4tech.us" - I believe there is also a dial4tech.uk? Interestingly it also shows a Sydney or NSW phone number as Australian contact!! Cheers Daniel
On 25/08/2013 3:27 PM, Daniel Jitnah wrote:
If you had said "OMG really? Oh no!" he would have move to phase two: convincing you to install a remote viewing server on your Windows box, so he can turn it into a zombie or pull your bank details or whatever. Yes, I actually have a video screen capture of an actual attack session which I recorded a while back in a XP Virtualbox snapshot VM made specially for the purpose.!! Its about 1/2 hr long, through a lot of it nothing happens while "Jason" goes on and on about how my PC is infected and I am doomed etc. Pity it has no audio. When I have time I will edit and make it viewable in say 5-10 mins, with comments or voice over.
That might be a bit interesting, but what makes you think that everything that was done, was visible? Remote cmd shell execution via psexec for instance.... There are installers that will allow /quiet and hidden/ installation options. They may also traverse your home network, possibly infecting or owning other Windows boxen. Oh and many of the XP exploits will go in hiding (and most probably have already), to ensure that M$ doesn't patch them up before D-Day for XP in April next year. You need a before and after full registry export for comparison, as well as a full image of any possibly touched file systems, boot records or anything else that could be compromised. Anybody still running XP on ANY machine beyond April next year is really going to be asking for trouble, unless they are completely disconnected from any kind of Internet access at any time in the future. Cheers A.
Daniel Jitnah wrote:
On 25/08/13 15:10, Trent W. Buck wrote:
Daniel Jitnah wrote:
True phone conversation at about 17.30 today (24/8/13)... ... the website they lead you to, and which I was talking about is "dial4tech.us"
Being curious about the difference between ".us" and " " ; I discovered "Why choose .US? * To register a .US domain, you must have a presence in the United States. Visitors to your site will know their information is secure * You'll be internationally respected as a site with American values * With many .US domain names still available, you'll be sure to get the website name you want " on: http://www.domain.com/domains/tlds/us.bml Which opens up the possibility of a conversation: " I notice your organisation doesn't have a ".us" domain name; which of the above criteria does it not fulfill ? " :- ) regards Rohan McLeod
Daniel Jitnah wrote:
On 25/08/13 15:10, Trent W. Buck wrote:
Daniel Jitnah wrote:
True phone conversation at about 17.30 today (24/8/13)... ... the website they lead you to, and which I was talking about is "dial4tech.us" Yes of course. To add to this story, I also checked who is the domain was registered to.
And I don't remember how exactly I find that out that (some google search sequence?) but the person named is mentionned to live at an address somewhere in Baltimore, USA. .. and following this address traced him on googlemap and from a real estate website, the address was described as being a house for sale and home of a young Indian/(or Asian) couple. (got to admit my memory a little bit hazy, it may not be Baltimore, but I certainly remember finding the place on google street view! - was a very MacMansion type of house with a large garage and driveway!, similar to a house you'd find in newish outer Melb suburbs, such as Cranbourne. Cheers, Daniel.
Being curious about the difference between ".us" and " " ; I discovered
"Why choose .US?
* To register a .US domain, you must have a presence in the United States. Visitors to your site will know their information is secure * You'll be internationally respected as a site with American values * With many .US domain names still available, you'll be sure to get the website name you want "
on: http://www.domain.com/domains/tlds/us.bml
Which opens up the possibility of a conversation: " I notice your organisation doesn't have a ".us" domain name; which of the above criteria does it not fulfill ? " :- )
regards Rohan McLeod _______________________________________________ luv-talk mailing list luv-talk@lists.luv.asn.au http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-talk
Daniel Jitnah wrote:
Daniel Jitnah wrote:
On 25/08/13 15:10, Trent W. Buck wrote:
Daniel Jitnah wrote:
True phone conversation at about 17.30 today (24/8/13)... ... the website they lead you to, and which I was talking about is "dial4tech.us" Yes of course. To add to this story, I also checked who is the domain was registered to.
............snip - was a very MacMansion type of house with a large garage and driveway!, similar to a house you'd find in newish outer Melb suburbs, such as Cranbourne. Goodness it's frightening what can be discovered !.
I am curious how long the conversation would persist if one resolutely and obtusely persisted, with the delusion that ' oh Microsoft support has finally got back to me about that bug I reported.........' Should confess that when bored, I have occasionally played such games with sales people trying to sell me a new phone account ! regards Rohan McLeod
Rohan McLeod wrote:
Which opens up the possibility of a conversation: " I notice your organisation doesn't have a ".us" domain name; which of the above criteria does it not fulfill ? " :- )
I once asked why hcoop.net was not h.coop. They met the criteria, but a .coop registration was significantly more expensive than a .net registration. (sigh!) IME US companies don't bother with a .us domain because the .com/.edu/.mil &c TLDs are implicitly US-centric, so why bother with a ccTLD? That's only for nasty foreigners who were too LAZY to build their own internet! ...oh, but they like .us for stupid "domain hacks". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_hack
FWIW, There is a new version... just got a call 5 mins ago... "This is Julie from Telstra. We have been receiving error messages from your internet registration number ...." "What is my internet registration number?" "<<< undecipherable garbage >>> What is my internet registraion number???" Julie hanged up. Was having dinner no time to play anyway!'' Got them twice today!! was busy earlier. I hanged up. Daniel On Mon, 2013-08-26 at 12:06 +1000, Trent W. Buck wrote:
Rohan McLeod wrote:
Which opens up the possibility of a conversation: " I notice your organisation doesn't have a ".us" domain name; which of the above criteria does it not fulfill ? " :- )
I once asked why hcoop.net was not h.coop. They met the criteria, but a .coop registration was significantly more expensive than a .net registration. (sigh!)
IME US companies don't bother with a .us domain because the .com/.edu/.mil &c TLDs are implicitly US-centric, so why bother with a ccTLD? That's only for nasty foreigners who were too LAZY to build their own internet!
...oh, but they like .us for stupid "domain hacks". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_hack _______________________________________________ luv-talk mailing list luv-talk@lists.luv.asn.au http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-talk
Quoting Trent W. Buck (trentbuck@gmail.com):
Rohan McLeod wrote:
Which opens up the possibility of a conversation: " I notice your organisation doesn't have a ".us" domain name; which of the above criteria does it not fulfill ? " :- )
I once asked why hcoop.net was not h.coop. They met the criteria, but a .coop registration was significantly more expensive than a .net registration. (sigh!)
IME US companies don't bother with a .us domain because the .com/.edu/.mil &c TLDs are implicitly US-centric, so why bother with a ccTLD?
The major gTLDs are not so much implicitly US-centric as they are Internet default assumptions among users everywhere. Let's see, examples: Most famous company of Scotland is arguably The Royal Bank of Scotland plc (RBS), which is a subsidiary of Royal Bank of Scotlands Group plc. The holding company is at http://www.rbs.com/, which cross-links to the retail banking site for the UK, http://www.rbs.co.uk/ Famous German company? Let's try Bayer AG. Corporate site is http://www.bayer.com/ . (There are of course many subsidiaries.) Famous French company? Citroen SA, which I see is now part of holding company PSA Peugeot Citroen Group. Corporate site: http://www.citroen.com/ (There are national subsidiary sites including http://www.citroen.com.au/ and http://www.citroen.co.uk/ .) Hmm, Air France (technically, Société Air France, S.A.) -- can't get much more French than that. It's part of holding company Air France-KLM Group, and the French Republic owns a bit over 50% of the shares of one or the other of those. Corporate site: http://www.airfrance.com/ My point is that the major gTLDs are an international default assumption, much more than they are 'implicitly US-centric'.
Rick Moen wrote:
Quoting Trent W. Buck (trentbuck@gmail.com):
............ much snipped: My point is that the major gTLDs are an international default assumption, much more than they are 'implicitly US-centric'.
Yes; well " " does seem logically ( in the sense of 'not specific to any nation') ; to be a good fit for 'international'; one wonders then, how the system would be extended to extra-terrestrial locations ? regards Rohan McLeod
Yes; well " " does seem logically ( in the sense of 'not specific to any nation') ; to be a good fit for 'international'; one wonders then, how the system would be extended to extra-terrestrial locations ?
Following the scheme, it would logically have to be: luv.asn.au.earth, luv.asn.au.mars luv.asn.au.earth.our_solar_system luv.asn.au.earth.our_solar_system.milkyway ... Don't you worry, the is an infinite supply of LUV to keep on spreading!! :) But there does lie a problem! Is there a common name for 'our_solar_system'?? never heard of one? (probably an astronomical identification exists) May be its time to name "our_solar_system" .... uuhmmmm.... "Solar system Luv" ??? ... (perhaps deliberately decapitalised to lose the acronym meaning?). Cheers, Daniel.
regards Rohan McLeod
_______________________________________________ luv-talk mailing list luv-talk@lists.luv.asn.au http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-talk
Daniel Jitnah wrote:
luv.asn.au.earth, luv.asn.au.mars
At least TCP/IP has trouble with AU distances over c-speed fabrics; there is an IETF Working Group looking into it. (I can't remember their name, but quack finds http://www.dtnrg.org/.)
But there does lie a problem! Is there a common name for 'our_solar_system'?? never heard of one? (probably an astronomical identification exists)
Sol.
Trent W. Buck wrote:
Daniel Jitnah wrote: ...............snip
But there does lie a problem! Is there a common name for 'our_solar_system'?? never heard of one? (probably an astronomical identification exists) Sol. One can even imagine a solar terrestrial linux enthusiast's group entitled " Linux User-group Solar Terrestrial " ? :- |
regards Rohan McLeod
On 27/08/13 16:56, Rohan McLeod wrote:
Trent W. Buck wrote:
Daniel Jitnah wrote: ...............snip
But there does lie a problem! Is there a common name for 'our_solar_system'?? never heard of one? (probably an astronomical identification exists) Sol. Actually, need to correct myself. The name is "Solar_System".
While we commonly talk of other "solar systems", its of course correctly "Planetary systems" (The Solar System is a Planetary system.) so luv.asn.au.earth.solar_system.milkyway. or luv.asn.au.earth.sol.milkyway
One can even imagine a solar terrestrial linux enthusiast's group entitled " Linux User-group Solar Terrestrial " ? :- |
regards Rohan McLeod _______________________________________________ luv-talk mailing list luv-talk@lists.luv.asn.au http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-talk
On 27 August 2013 17:32, Daniel Jitnah <djitnah@greenwareit.com.au> wrote:
so luv.asn.au.earth.solar_system.milkyway. or luv.asn.au.earth.sol.milkyway
why not... luv.asn.au.earth.sol.oca.mw.lg.vsc oca = Orion Cygnus Arm mw = milkyway lg = local group vsc = Virgo super cluster ????
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Rohan McLeod <rhn@jeack.com.au> wrote:
Trent W. Buck wrote: <snip> One can even imagine a solar terrestrial linux enthusiast's group entitled " Linux User-group Solar Terrestrial " ? :- |
I could see Linux Users Victoria having a largely older membership while Linux User-group Solar Terrestrial would have a large amount of teenagers in it ranks -- Mark "Pockets" Clohesy Mob Phone: (+61) 406 417 877 Email: hiddensoul@twistedsouls.com G-Talk: mark.clohesy@gmail.com GNU/Linux..Linux Counter #457297 - "I would love to change the world, but they won't give me the source code" "Linux is user friendly...its just selective about who its friends are"
On 27/08/13 12:51 PM, Daniel Jitnah wrote:
But there does lie a problem! Is there a common name for 'our_solar_system'?? never heard of one? (probably an astronomical identification exists) .sol (common name for our sun :) ). :) - name it after the parent star. :D
-- 73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
Tony Langdon skrev 2013-08-27 10:32:
On 27/08/13 12:51 PM, Daniel Jitnah wrote:
But there does lie a problem! Is there a common name for 'our_solar_system'?? never heard of one? (probably an astronomical identification exists) .sol (common name for our sun :) ). :) - name it after the parent star. :D
Why not .sun then since the internet is primarily in English, not Latin or Portuguese or Norwegian or ...
On 27/08/2013 6:57 PM, Anders Holmström wrote:
Tony Langdon skrev 2013-08-27 10:32:
On 27/08/13 12:51 PM, Daniel Jitnah wrote:
But there does lie a problem! Is there a common name for 'our_solar_system'?? never heard of one? (probably an astronomical identification exists) .sol (common name for our sun :) ). :) - name it after the parent star. :D
Why not .sun then since the internet is primarily in English, not Latin or Portuguese or Norwegian or ...
Because Larry and Oracle would get their noses out of joint and start throwing lawyers against anyone who tried? Regards, Morrie. </Tongue_in_cheek>
Quoting Rohan McLeod (rhn@jeack.com.au):
Rick Moen wrote:
Quoting Trent W. Buck (trentbuck@gmail.com):
............ much snipped: My point is that the major gTLDs are an international default assumption, much more than they are 'implicitly US-centric'.
Yes; well " " does seem logically ( in the sense of 'not specific to any nation') ; to be a good fit for 'international';
I hope you take no offence by my saying I am a bit puzzled by the concept of " " -- unless it's some sort of non-technical metaphor, in which case I'm honestly not sure what it refers to.
one wonders then, how the system would be extended to extra-terrestrial locations ?
Um -- other TLDs, I guess. By the time we have a multiplanetary civilisation, I suspect the current Internet will be at best legacy infrastructure, if not gone. Near earth orbit is not so far a network issue. (I once heard a good talk by one of the founders of the Internet about what he called 'interplanentary internets', but that talked about IP packet handling problems, not domain namespace.)
Rick Moen wrote:
Quoting Rohan McLeod (rhn@jeack.com.au):
Rick Moen wrote:
..........snip Yes; well " " does seem logically ( in the sense of 'not specific to any nation') ; to be a good fit for 'international'; I hope you take no offence by my saying I am a bit puzzled by the concept of " " -- unless it's some sort of non-technical metaphor
Not at all; my linguistic standpoint is very definitely that the responsibility (and thus blame); is mine alone; that is if some word or term of mine fails to convey it's intended meaning ether by conveying : 1/a different meaning, 2/ no meaning or 3/ a multitude of meanings; the fault is mine alone !. By 'standpoint ' I intend: " a situation in which two or more points-of-view or approaches are possible; but only one is chosen." . So a 'standpoint' could be found to be untenable, but not false; in contrast with a 'theory' say which can be 'falsified'. An example of a different ' linguistic standpoint' would be one where responsibility was shared with the reader; as with contextual or metaphorical usage of words. Should you be interested in my eccentric linguistic standpoints and theories; there is a longer exposition at:. https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B0aOfcVEMVoKbk1BWG9xejl5UHc/edit?usp=sharing The concept of " " is intended non-technically, but not metaphorically as a symbol for, 'no national domain specified' ; if you have a better suggestion be my guest !
..... snip
By the time we have a multiplanetary civilisation, I suspect the current Internet will be at best legacy infrastructure,
That sounds interesting; I take it you are not just talking about the hardware or future iterations of IP packet versions (IPv4 , IPv6 ,....etc) ?
if not gone. Near earth orbit is not so far a network issue. (I once heard a good talk by one of the founders of the Internet about what he called 'interplanentary internets', but that talked about IP packet handling problems, not domain namespace.)
So domain namespace (nomenclature ?) was not considered an important problem ? regards Rohan McLeod
Quoting Rohan McLeod (rhn@jeack.com.au):
So domain namespace (nomenclature ?) was not considered an important problem ?
Well, not by Vinton Cerf in his talks on the subject, anyway. BTW, here's coverage: http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/05/vint-cerf-interplanetary-internet/ I first heard him talk on this subject in 1998 at the World Science Fiction Convention in Baltimore, as an unscheduled talk that Cerf suddenly offered. Seeing the hastily scrawled sign in the convention centre, I wandered in and was amused to see other members of the usual suspects of Linux/BSD persuasion also finding it. Cerf had some laptop setup problems with the projection equipment, allowing me to stand near the front and and indulge a golden one-liner: 'Excuse me: Is there anyone technical in the house?'
On 26/08/2013 10:54 AM, Rohan McLeod wrote:
Being curious about the difference between ".us" and " " ; I discovered
"Why choose .US?
* To register a .US domain, you must have a presence in the United States. Visitors to your site will know their information is secure * You'll be internationally respected as a site with American values * With many .US domain names still available, you'll be sure to get the website name you want "
on: http://www.domain.com/domains/tlds/us.bml
Which opens up the possibility of a conversation: " I notice your organisation doesn't have a ".us" domain name; which of the above criteria does it not fulfill ? " :- )
More significantly, each of those /values/ can be reasons NOT to want to be associated with the US ;) - "visitors to your site will know their information is subject to NSA spying" - "American values" .... not necessarily something to strive for. [ideologically, many in the world detest American values] - and / or religiously. We need a safe and open Internet protected from the over reach of the US Government and their spying agencies. Cheers A.
Quoting Rohan McLeod (rhn@jeack.com.au):
Being curious about the difference between ".us" and " " ; I discovered
"Why choose .US?
[Snip sales fluff. ;-> ] The DNS namespace grew rather than being planned, is the real explanation. For historical reasons, we've ended up with two-letter country-code TLDs (ccTLDs) like au. and us. alongside three-and-more-letter generic TLDs (gTLDs) such as com., org., net., gov., mil., aero., coop., info., mobi., and so on. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GTLD http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Country_code_top-level_domain And most recentlly, we have internationalised ccTLDs (IDN ccTLDs)... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internationalized_country_code_top-level_domain ...but I digress. The wide and lasting popularity of the major gTLDs from early on has made a reorg awkward and thus unlikely. For example, US Federal government domains _should_ have been grouped under gov.us. but instead emerged under gov. Likewise, US nonprofits _should_ have been in org.us. but instead sprouted up in org, and commercial firms should have been in com.us. but used com. instead. And now, of course. com. and other primary gTLD namespaces are popular... because they're popular. The us. ccTLD is primarily used by USA non-Federal government entities (mostly cities and counties). Even there, it's often spurned as undesirable namespace. E.g., my local town (Menlo Park, California) owns menlo-park.ca.us. but is mostly known by menlopark.org. (Please note that I've consistently used, above, the full-qualified form of domain names, i.e., ending in the period that denotes the namespace root. The closing dot is often omitted but is technically necessary to avoid ambiguity, and sometimes is required for correct operation of software.)
participants (12)
-
Anders Holmström -
Andrew McGlashan -
Daniel Jitnah -
Duncan Roe -
Hiddensoul (Mark Clohesy) -
Jason King -
Lauchlin Wilkinson -
Morrie Wyatt -
Rick Moen -
Rohan McLeod -
Tony Langdon -
Trent W. Buck