Same problems here, no problems on other international sites.
Apparently there's nothing particularly suspect in the log. You should perform another scan with HouseCall and compare the results to the previous scan.
The only way to be sure about the presence of malware would be analysing each running process and each autorun object (legitimate or not) using additional software. Process Explorer and Autoruns by Sysinternals are exceptionally well made for a thorough manual inspection.
If you suspect the file is hidden because of a rootkit, use an antirootkit. AVG, Sophos and F-Secure (Blacklight) provide one-click solutions. They're not the best, but sometimes they're enough. Attributes and permissions may be another cause of 'invisibility'. Be sure to show all files, included hidden ones.
The only way to be sure about the presence of malware would be analysing each running process and each autorun object (legitimate or not) using additional software. Process Explorer and Autoruns by Sysinternals are exceptionally well made for a thorough manual inspection.
If you suspect the file is hidden because of a rootkit, use an antirootkit. AVG, Sophos and F-Secure (Blacklight) provide one-click solutions. They're not the best, but sometimes they're enough. Attributes and permissions may be another cause of 'invisibility'. Be sure to show all files, included hidden ones.
You forgot Powell and Libby, with varying demerits and varying degrees of conscience. And the now forgotten and replaced previous spokesperson for the president (also him with - ahem - family problems like Rove).
Too early, really?
Off topic but not that much, given the number and the importance of people who were forced to leave this administration: U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales resigns. Another one bites the dust. Sign of the times? Que sera sera, whatever will be will be.
Bradracer is right. It seems an LFSW problem, not a master server one.
It is outright criminal. 2 years in jail, here. In France it shouldn't be that different.
Sorry but as far as I know you can't host servers with Fastweb. Fastweb works with shared public IPs and gives you only a private, non-routable IP address. This means you can only generate outgoing connections and, unless you buy a public IP address if possible (but it cost an eye and a leg, some time ago), you cannot receive incoming connections since the network wouldn't know where to route it.
That's the reason why Fastweb needs a modified version of E-Mule, for instance, which works better inside Fastweb network.
Additional info in Italian, taken from a forum:
Con fastweb il discorso cambia. L'HAG ha un suo indirizzo che fa capo alla centralina del palazzo, che fa capo alla centralina della zona, che fa capo alla centralina della Città, che fa capo alla centrale geografica. E fino a quel punto non si ha alcun IP pubblico.
Dalla centrale Fastweb ti assegna un indirizzo legato ad una certa porta (una delle 65.5xx per intenderci..) Ad un ipotetico altro Utente può assegnare lo stesso indirizzo IP pubblico, ma su un'altra porta..
Teoricamente, così facendo anche 30.40.000 Utenti possono utilizzare lo stesso IP pubblico (ognuno su porte differenti).
That's the reason why Fastweb needs a modified version of E-Mule, for instance, which works better inside Fastweb network.
Additional info in Italian, taken from a forum:
Con fastweb il discorso cambia. L'HAG ha un suo indirizzo che fa capo alla centralina del palazzo, che fa capo alla centralina della zona, che fa capo alla centralina della Città, che fa capo alla centrale geografica. E fino a quel punto non si ha alcun IP pubblico.
Dalla centrale Fastweb ti assegna un indirizzo legato ad una certa porta (una delle 65.5xx per intenderci..) Ad un ipotetico altro Utente può assegnare lo stesso indirizzo IP pubblico, ma su un'altra porta..
Teoricamente, così facendo anche 30.40.000 Utenti possono utilizzare lo stesso IP pubblico (ognuno su porte differenti).
You're right Dustin, he never had a point and he was just interested in disrupting everything, running away when exposed. If he just listened to what other people had to say (that's a form of caring) he wouldn't be banned at the moment. For instance, when I said I was tired and this is much worse than being angry.
Obviously I wasn't the only one being tired: he's been warned countless times. But he didn't care. So he just asked for a ban.
Obviously I wasn't the only one being tired: he's been warned countless times. But he didn't care. So he just asked for a ban.
No, not all wars are pretty much the same, no matter how stupid the name you give to them. Vietnam and Iraq are comparable because they share an important common trait: guerrilla tactics, and the US military is completely unprepared. As Hankstar said, you can kill millions of people and lose a few tens of thousand ones, and still lose a whole war.
Gunn, your first sentence made me smile. Iraq was no threat and no harbour to terrorists, yet the US managed to create a region where the rule of law is totally absent and up to date no one has been able to restore it. This has created safe havens and a population supporting insurgency. Terrorists (the real ones) don't even have to move from there to hit the States' sinking reputation. This war was a very bad call, and it was so from the start. No shifting rationale can change this fact.
Last edited by Albieg, .
You may a problem with rights (administration rights or file permissions): LFS has to be patched and restarted, and the file doing it cannot be created.
I take a look at the topic and at the odd original post and I thought hey, it's almost impossible to go off topic. That's really an achievement, w4h.
About the rest: I'm not able to think about what will happen in 10 years. I can't calculate all the possibilities, something always surprises me, and I like it.
It's probably something that happens when you don't have a mechanical view of life. However what Racer X says can be possible.
About the thread title: this is one of the best pieces you'll find around about the parallel between Iraq and Vietnam. It's pretty scary, and you don't even have to read between the lines.
Nothing strange in services, except more antiviruses installed at the same time. Then - again - there are lots more autoruns locations to check.
Right, I see you judge my advice as silly. I'll just sit and watch from now on, I don't like being attacked on my professionality.
Right, I see you judge my advice as silly. I'll just sit and watch from now on, I don't like being attacked on my professionality.
It could be the OS malfunctioning, or some malware protected by a rootkit.
Take a look at the Event Viewer, and consider the possibility of a good session of rootkit hunting. (Rootkits amuse me, they are more challenging than other malware
)
I cannot stress enough the importance of being careful when using software that can have a deep impact on a working system, such as an antirootkit. Although not certainly favourites of mine, BlackLight Beta, Sophos Antirootkit and AVG Antirootkit may help, especially if you don't want to fiddle with the best ones, which need a better OS knowledge. Before you delete or disactivate something get some information about it. If you find that you don't have important permissions (such as SeDebug) while having admin rights then it's definitely malware.
Using a Restore point to go back when things were working may help too, but this isn't generally a good idea when you suspect malware is involved.
Check also - with Sysinternals Autoruns - the presence of suspect Winsock Providers, along with different suspect stuff.
Otherwise do what laymen advise: reinstall. For me it's seldom a good idea, but it just depends on your willingness to understand and solve a problem. I do it only when I find a damage I deem too extensive to repair (such as lots of lost permissions and deleted files), so a reinstall saves time.
Take a look at the Event Viewer, and consider the possibility of a good session of rootkit hunting. (Rootkits amuse me, they are more challenging than other malware
)I cannot stress enough the importance of being careful when using software that can have a deep impact on a working system, such as an antirootkit. Although not certainly favourites of mine, BlackLight Beta, Sophos Antirootkit and AVG Antirootkit may help, especially if you don't want to fiddle with the best ones, which need a better OS knowledge. Before you delete or disactivate something get some information about it. If you find that you don't have important permissions (such as SeDebug) while having admin rights then it's definitely malware.
Using a Restore point to go back when things were working may help too, but this isn't generally a good idea when you suspect malware is involved.
Check also - with Sysinternals Autoruns - the presence of suspect Winsock Providers, along with different suspect stuff.
Otherwise do what laymen advise: reinstall. For me it's seldom a good idea, but it just depends on your willingness to understand and solve a problem. I do it only when I find a damage I deem too extensive to repair (such as lots of lost permissions and deleted files), so a reinstall saves time.
I watched the old (already debated) one. I don't know if it's similar. If it's not, I'll take a look. If you prefer sending me a pm, feel free to do so.
Yes it is, since it's done on a system belonging to Scavier. It's in their best interest (and that of the whole community) to keep it clean and decide what to do to prevent a user from doing it again, so an email or a private message would have sufficed. No egos boosted, no witch hunt, no useless public debate on crime and punishment.
For instance, modifying the way an executable file works to get an undue advantage. That's different from allowed but debatable lines, and it's different from bumpdrafting. Have you ever tried to submit a hotlap obtained via bumpdrafting?
It means: everyone may be right or wrong, it's not the numbers of people who agree or disagree that count. Judas or Jesus?
But wait, I can't see Jesus here... so a bit of understanding may help in this case. Reasons of opportunity have to be debated somewhere else.
Edit: not Judas
, Barabbas (the thief)...
But wait, I can't see Jesus here... so a bit of understanding may help in this case. Reasons of opportunity have to be debated somewhere else.
Edit: not Judas
, Barabbas (the thief)...Consensus isn't truth, The Very End, and by the way not all things happen under the sun, nor they have to.
If you have a router, check the router. About the ISP, it could be blocking some traffic on the port used by LFS. This could be easily tested, but more words about it must come either from the ISP or from LFS staff. Proceed with all the checks and tests (tracert included) and be sure your version is recent.
Check your firewall, refer to the link in my previous post if it's Windows Firewall.
This stuff curiously reminds me of a psychiatrist, a Colonel who was in charge of the psychiatric section of the military hospital in my town. He's a specialist in emergencies and he's extremely interested in deviant human behaviour. So - not so ironically - he chose the military (I guess his penchant for women didn't allow him to join the Church instead). He said this was a sort of mission, for him. He believed much more in psychotherapy than in psychiatry. He had a rather contorted sense of duty, however. A friend of mine told me something about him. He was told by his doctor, who was also in the military.
Eventually, when I met this psychiatrist again I asked him, almost abruptly: "Have you ever dressed like a priest?"
He was delighted to answer. "Of course! I really like it! Some nuns even wanted me to celebrate Mass, but I declined. I said I had to go."
One of the nicest persons I've met in my life. And an excellent officer too (no pun intended).
Eventually, when I met this psychiatrist again I asked him, almost abruptly: "Have you ever dressed like a priest?"
He was delighted to answer. "Of course! I really like it! Some nuns even wanted me to celebrate Mass, but I declined. I said I had to go."
One of the nicest persons I've met in my life. And an excellent officer too (no pun intended).
Last edited by Albieg, .
As we say - a bit harshly - in Italy, Those who lived hoping died shitting. Luckily I'm practical enough to survive my deluded hopes, at least to this day
If this is your idea of military, I disagree because it's a stupid idea. Refer to the original thread for more information.
Edit: and by the way, changing or deleting your signature after my post has been a wise idea. Only time will tell if you did it because you want to delete your footsteps, because you want to do something nastier or, as I hope, because you understood what I wrote.
Last edited by Albieg, .
Torture doesn't work. Although the protocols for interrogations have been developed with the help of APA members they have discovered that those methods are counterproductive, and shaming their name. So they're trying to back off with the minimal damage possible.
This is, in no way, an ideal fight. This is about the practical implications of a method which is tremendously error prone, and at the same time morally reproachable.
It's my opinion, however, that this happens - also - because the ship is sinking, and anyone who was willing to have part in a victory is unwilling to share the burden of defeat. In other words, if things were perceived as good by the general public, the ethical problem would simply go away for the majority of people. After all, victory is the only reason for which you're willing to fight a war. If victory is impossible you surrender and try to negotiate the best possible conditions, or you seek a honourable death.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG