DDOS attack Microsoft

Discussion in 'Computer Security' started by Manoj Paul Joseph, Sep 7, 2003.

  1. Manoj Paul Joseph

    Ed Murphy Guest

    [Bit of a side digression here:]

    "Best Viewed at 1024 x 768"

    "Click to view Images"

    If you're going to advertise your site in your .sig, then at least
    take a little time and learn why both of the above are Bad Ideas.

    Oh, and your URL is improperly formed; it should have a / on the end.
    Ed Murphy, Sep 16, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. Manoj Paul Joseph

    Max Burke Guest

    Ed Murphy scribbled:
    Care to enlighten me?
    Should it?

    Does it cause an error when you try to go there?
    Max Burke, Sep 16, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. Manoj Paul Joseph

    Ed Murphy Guest

    1) Web sites should look good when viewed at any resolution. (Well, I
    wouldn't worry about less than 640 x 480, unless you're specifically
    targeting a Palm audience.) "Best Viewed at <resolution>" annoys
    anyone who can't, or doesn't want to, devote that much screen real
    estate to the browser window.

    2) Link text shouldn't include "click here" (or similar), because it
    ass-u-mes the viewer is using a WIMP [1] interface. What if they're
    using a text-only browser like Lynx? What if they're blind, and using
    software that reads the contents of the page to them? Okay, your
    site is visual/graphic in nature anyway, but it's still just generally
    inelegant. Whatever *follows* (or would follow) "click here" is
    usually a good candidate for link text.


    There is a standing convention that when a collection is referred to
    by its name without a trailing slash, the trailing slash is
    automatically appended. Due to this, a resource may accept a URI
    without a trailing "/" to point to a collection. In this case it
    SHOULD return a content-location header in the response pointing to
    the URI ending with the "/". For example, if a client invokes a
    method on http://foo.bar/blah (no trailing slash), the resource
    http://foo.bar/blah/ (trailing slash) may respond as if the operation
    were invoked on it, and should return a content-location header with
    http://foo.bar/blah/ in it. In general clients SHOULD use the "/"
    form of collection names.

    RFC 2616 is said to have something on this issue as well, but it's
    apparently a non-obvious implication of something else.
    No. Fortunately for you, your web server is configured to detect and
    correct the error automatically. Some web servers can be configured
    to behave differently when you include or exclude the trailing slash:


    and some automated systems have trouble dealing with the concept of
    auto-correction by adding the missing trailing slash:

    Ed Murphy, Sep 16, 2003
  4. Manoj Paul Joseph

    Max Burke Guest

    Ed Murphy scribbled:
    So it's not an actual fault then? I design the pages around the 1024x768
    screen resolution, therefore that's the best screen size to view them.
    It's not like I'm forcing anyone to view them at that resolution....
    Which is why *I* include that link. Of course I could leave it out all
    together and have no indication at all on how to view the images.....
    Then pray tell how would they SEE the images?
    It's a minimalist website to display my photographs Ed.
    If I could I'd not have any text at all..... In fact I think I'll do
    that the next time I update it. That way there will be no distracting
    text to confuse the 'punters'.... ROTFLOL
    Which is the sole reason for it's existence....
    "click here" *is* link text......
    Max Burke, Sep 16, 2003
  5. Manoj Paul Joseph

    Ed Murphy Guest

    Faulty design practice. Proper design practice is "design to look good
    at any size", with 640x480 as the /de facto/ lowest common denominator
    in most cases.
    Whoops, forgot the footnote.

    [1] Windows/Icons/Mouse/Pointer
    Okay, but then you should have ALT="text" within the image tags. (In
    case the browser has trouble loading the image, e.g. due to Internet
    Yeah, but it's not *good* link text. Another, more reasonable
    example: Some browsers have an option to extract *just* the links
    from a page, and list them in a new window. Pages with lots of
    <a href="foo.html"> click here </a> links are particularly unsuited
    for that type of thing.

    Mind you, this is just casual friendly sniping. I would follow and
    recommend stricter guidelines if we were talking about web sites that
    you get paid to design.
    Ed Murphy, Sep 16, 2003
  6. Manoj Paul Joseph

    Ant Guest

    [snip & xposts trimmed]
    A mouse is a pointer. For mouse read menu.
    Ant, Sep 16, 2003
  7. The embeded systems used for medical use cannot freez up or crash
    ever. I reboot my windows machine 7 times a day, 8 or nine if I'm
    feeling Zen.

    I love windows don't get me wrong but wouldn't bet my life on them not

    Some people have computers installed in their hearts to keep them
    beating. How about Autopilot? Surviving a major nuclear attack? Will
    MS give confirmation codes to people who's hardware pukes out if
    Seatle is flattened like a Hiroshima pancake?
    If people are going to give away so much of their bodily function to a
    machine it must be to one that they know they can trust
    Learning linux will give you controll over all other operating
    systems. Only understanding every detail of a functioning
    computer(hardware and software) can make it safe to allow our hearts
    and minds to be controlled by machines. If the terrorists learn linux
    they will be able to buy discarded office computers for pennies on the
    dollar and sucessfully figure out how to kill us by implimenting
    MSOS comes preinstalled in 96% of the machines the other 4% are
    macintosh. The only machines that come preinstalled with linux are
    high end servers and cluster super computers, Note that ten years ago
    linux was nothing other than a student project and today its a student
    project thats gone hideously awry. Ten years ago linux was nothing,
    Now it is the leading edge. That can change since some clever person
    can understand a kernal and come to a radically new and ingenious
    solution. But not if the fucntions are hidden.

    MS- mediocrity is the mode, people like to pick on macintosh/windows,
    but if linux got popular whatever brand would be the cons, right now
    the pro's are familiar with mac/os/Ms but use linux to overlord
    BSD(unix)/windows mixes or BSD/Mac (mac being Auqua-Darwin a NEC
    linux/unix offshoot)

    The cons are the spammers, spywarers, virus-ers, get with the pro's
    and let go of the bullshit thats ruining the internet or at least
    putting it years behind where it should be.

    Stopping SPAM and completely virus free OS has already been solved

    a. Users want to
    Computers should do +EXACTLY+ what the user wants and act entirely in
    the interest of the user.

    HAving more understandable benchmarks rather than fuzzy guessing
    RAM/GHZ/HD-RPMs/ to a somewhat technically minded person todays modern
    computers are a joke, wasting ram, turning your hardrive into
    sphaghetti, and such, confusing graphics with actual function.

    You pay a premium for GHZ/ and RAM use it don't waste it.

    For pay operating systems should have been trying out new algorythms
    emulating them with Supercomputers and getting a smaller kernal with
    faster more dynamic compression algorythms. This would have happened
    if there had been competition just like the chip market, instead
    modern os are a bunch of programs stuffed together with a gui.
    Here here, kill your television.
    Bob the Knobb, Sep 16, 2003
  8. Manoj Paul Joseph

    Max Burke Guest

    Ed Murphy scribbled:
    No it isn't.
    I do.
    All definitions of size are defined as a percentage of the screen
    resolution of the computer they're being displayed on, except for the
    size of the images themselves; They are defined explicitly as x pixels X
    y pixels. That's because I have decided what size I want the images to
    be displayed at.
    Things like tables, page size, etc are defined as a percentage or the
    screen resolution.....
    Resolution of 640x480? 800x600? 1024X768? Then they're displayed as X%
    of that screen resolution
    That GOOD design practice.......
    I do. (on the main page) hover over the image or the title banner to see

    On they images pages themselves I deliberately dont, because I dont
    'title' my images, so it's not a fault. it's *by design*......
    I want people to see my images Ed, not inane titles in an ALT="text"
    Yes it is. It tells people to click to view the images......
    I just my homepage Ed. It's just to show 'the world' my images., that's
    Max Burke, Sep 16, 2003
  9. I doubt Windows is that bad. I hated Windows so much I switched to Linux
    in early 1998 and never looked back except to run TurboTax and Quicken.

    But my Windows 95 crashed only about three times a week. It was idle
    most of the time, if that makes a difference. The programs crashed more
    often than that, many times a day. Other than Netscape 3.*, they were
    all provided at considerable expense by Microsoft, so there should have
    been no compatibility problems. Ha! And Visual C++ could not be
    installed at the same time as Office Professional because of conflicting
    <B>.dll</B> file requirements. Whenever I wanted to run one of them, I
    had to remove the other and install the one I needed. Pretty crappy.

    But I imagine the current releases of Window are less crash-prone than
    Windows 95, even with bandaids #1 and #2. So if yours crashes 7 times a
    day or more, I would expect hardware problems in addition to the crummy
    OS. If yours is an Intel *86 machine, I suggest you run memtest86 and
    see if the memory is OK to begin with.
    Jean-David Beyer, Sep 16, 2003
  10. Manoj Paul Joseph

    Ed Murphy Guest

    Then the "best viewed at 1024x768" notice should be irrelevant. So take
    it out, because lots of people look at that and immediately think "ooh,
    lousy site, don't bother, click to the next one".
    ALT="text" only shows up while the image is still in the process of
    being transferred. Some browsers also show it when you put the mouse
    pointer over the image; check out webshots.com for an example of how
    this is used to excellent effect. (I think there's a more recent
    standard that suggests TITLE="text" for that purpose. w3.org should
    have details.)
    Except that they may not *be* clicking. (Even if they're using an
    ordinary graphic browser, they may be using the keyboard.)

    "View Images" as link text would avoid the ugly 'click here' phrase. As
    an extra bonuses, it's shorter.
    Ed Murphy, Sep 16, 2003
  11. Manoj Paul Joseph

    Ed Murphy Guest

    To be fair, Linux may not be appropriate either in such cases. If an
    embedded system must guarantee zero faults, then there's a decent chance
    that it must also guarantee real-time processing. Linux is not designed
    for such a guarantee; there are other OSes (I think QnX is one of them)
    specifically for that purpose.
    Not the *only* machines. I'm writing this message on a counterexample.
    Ed Murphy, Sep 16, 2003
  12. The use of a text-based browser doesn't necessarily mean a lack of
    graphics ability. Plenty of people use lynx/w3m/links in an xterm on an
    X display for various reasons, and these are quite capable of displaying
    the graphics in a separate window with something like xv (at least w3m
    can). I think the latest versions of some of these can display the
    graphics inline.

    Doctor J. Frink, Sep 17, 2003
  13. Manoj Paul Joseph

    Leythos Guest

    Hey guys, how about considering that sites, public or not, are designed
    with a purpose in mind, and a look/feel also. While some people still
    use 640x480, that number is irrelevant to what they designer was trying
    to build.

    We've built many Federal and local government sites that run best at
    800x600, and some that are designed for 1024x768 in order to make the
    information more presentable and user friendly.

    target with "some" consideration for the rest.

    I can honestly tell you that almost all of our customers request 800x600
    and not 640x480. While compliance with the standards for disabled is
    mandated by Fed/Local government, other sites DO NOT HAVE TO COMPLY.
    Again, it's based on who your client and visitors are targeting.
    Leythos, Sep 17, 2003
  14. ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.os.linux.misc.]
    Over the years people seem to have forgotten that HTML was not intended to
    be a page layout language; if fact quite the contrary. It was intended to
    provide access to information while allowing the client to determine how
    best to display or otherwise use it.
    John Thompson, Sep 18, 2003
  15. Manoj Paul Joseph

    Bob Marcan Guest

    Bob Marcan, Sep 24, 2003
  16. Manoj Paul Joseph

    Leythos Guest

    Your posting of their OPINION shows how much you DON'T know about
    converting client server apps to web applications. There is more to the
    design of a web interface than the idea that it's designed for the
    entire world. If you design your site for your target audience then you
    have built a site that meets the requirements and provides the most
    features for your audience - it does not have to work with all browsers,
    be compatible with the blind, have easy to view colors, etc... It HAS TO

    You design the site for the audience it's intended for, which does not
    mean that one set of guidelines fit all development projects.

    No matter how many times you say that all sites have to comply with a
    universal compatibility guideline you will be wrong.

    In the early days web interfaces were best designed for use with all
    browsers, then came the ability (as the technology improved) to convert
    green screen, client server apps, vb/c/c++ apps to web interfaces, and
    all the guidelines for PUBLIC users didn't mean anything. Imagine if you
    were doing a call center application for Verizon, to replace their old
    CS application, and you told them that they had to make the interface
    compatible with Opera, Mozilla, IE3,4,5,6, and that it had to run at
    640x480 and only use about 32 colors! They would throw you out the door,
    it's about more than just public brochure sites, people are using web
    interfaces for entire business systems now.

    Leythos, Sep 24, 2003
  17. Manoj Paul Joseph

    Bob Marcan Guest

    If it is specialized application for the closed audience, O.K.
    I just switched my bank. They used certificates and the only way to get
    it is using IE, then import to Mozilla. I said tnx and go to the other.
    Searching for the new door http://www.fbsblindate.it/ , flash only.
    Guess, will i buy something from this comany?

    Regards, Bob
    Bob Marcan, Sep 24, 2003
  18. Manoj Paul Joseph

    El Mariachi Guest

    I have none of these problems with Microsoft products, my suggestion
    is to use help files and follow instructions.
    El Mariachi, Sep 25, 2003
  19. Manoj Paul Joseph

    Paul Lutus Guest

    El Mariachi wrote:

    Following instructions doesn't help those thouands of Windows users whose
    machines have been taken over by security hole exploits, without any action
    on their part whatsoever. So your suggestion is utter nonsense.
    Paul Lutus, Sep 25, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.