Re: TI-H: Linux ftp

[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: TI-H: Linux ftp


>On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 04:00:29PM -0900, Grant Stockly wrote:
>>
>> >On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 01:45:26PM -0900, Grant Stockly wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >If he wants to run an FTP server, than DHCP is not the solution. Also,
>> >> >there should be no problem with the things that are started at startup.
>> >> >Unless of course you installed samba (uninstall that, it's microsloth
>> >> >networking stuff). If you're running RedHat 5.2, you don't need to
>>upgrade
>> >> >sendmail, it's already the latest version. And Grant, since when did you
>> >> >know dick about using Linux?
>> >>
>> >> Hmmm...  applecyber.dyndns.com?  gussie.alaska.net?  Linux/68k.
>> >>
>> >> DHCP is the solution for his windows box.
>> >Uh...no? He wants both the Linux box and the windows box on the same
>> >ethernet port, i.e. using the SAME IP address (I doubt that GATech gives
>> >you more than one). So the easiest (although for such a small network, it's
>> >almost a toss-up) solution is to give the PC a static IP like 192.168.1.2
>> >(in fact i recommend that one) and the second ethernet card on the
>>Linux box
>> >192.168.1.1 and then letting the primary ethernet card use DHCP to get it's
>> >IP, and setting up IP Masquerading. That way, if he wants to add more
>> >boxen, he just has to hook them up to the secondary ethernet card's
>> >network, and give them unique IP's in the 192.168.0.0/16 subnet.
>>
>> Ummm...  No.  DHCP server for the linux box.  He'd be smart to look at what
>Are you implying that you want to run a dhcp server on the Linux box so the
>Windows box can grab an IP from it? Because that'd just waste startup time
>on the windows box. It's easier to just give them all static IPs in the
>non-internet IP range.

Waste startup time?  a quarter of a second?  :/  I'd do it...  Then if a
friend came over s/he would just plug it in.  Name servers and all...

>> was installed...  There are a ton of holes in the set that comes with
>In the older RedHat's, yes (i.e. 5.0 and 5.1), but 5.2 is relatively error
>free, at least from an external standpoint. Besides, a newbie Linux user
>would have no idea which programs were possibly eploitable. The only one
>you've really got to worry about is sendmail, it's had more externally
>accessibly buffer exploits than all other daemons combined.

There are no 'bad' programs, but if the yellow page programs installed are
active and the box isn't setup correctly bad things could happen...  :(
References: