2,657 reputation
1217
bio website no.steenking.blog.here
location Cluj-Napoca, Romania
age 37
visits member for 5 years, 6 months
seen Jul 30 at 20:16
Clobbering memory at the end of a pointer...

May
5
comment Private IP address in public DNS
@Alnitak: I understand where you're coming from but that's still not a DNS problem, and I maintain that trying to fix issues originating somewhere else through DNS is not a good idea at all. Problems should be fixed at the source, not patched up by DNS hacks - hacks make networks brittle.
May
5
comment Private IP address in public DNS
Correction: Make that "seeing routing problems and DNS issues and authentication/identity issues colluded".
May
5
comment Private IP address in public DNS
If someone on your network "made up" an IP number then the IP protocol is functioning exactly as designed, i.e. without security in mind. What you are asking is "how can I trust that I'm actually talking to whomever I'm supposed to talk to?" and the answer to that cannot be delivered by IP and/or by DNS, the answer to that is delivered by DNSSEC and/or SSL/TLS and/or an application layer mechanism.
May
5
comment Private IP address in public DNS
(reposted commend for clarification)
May
5
comment Private IP address in public DNS
How is delivering mail to the wrong machine a DNS problem? You should authenticate the SMTP server. That's a SMTP configuration problem which has absolutely nothing to do with DNS. You're not even comparing apples to oranges here, you're comparing a radioactive buttered toast to five milligrams of Lagrangian derivatives on a stick. If you're worrying about getting the wrong MX or A result you should use DNSSEC instead of holding DNS responsible for what it's not responsible, and if you're mistakenly delivering SMTP to the wrong RFC1918 number you've misconfigured or misdesigned your network.
May
5
comment Private IP address in public DNS
I know it's not rocket science, but it's a maintenance overhead and a potential security risk. Certainly a higher security risk than leaking the existence of a RFC1918 network. DNS traffic is utterly negligible - I host in excess of 80 moderately large and busy zone files on my DNS at work and weekly DNS traffic is less than 2 minutes of Youtube. Speeding up query resolution is actually the first halfway sane argument against RFC1918 numbers in DNS I've seen here :) Upvoted for actually thinking a bit beyond the usual knee-jerk "oh, noes, it's a security risk" reaction :)
May
5
comment Private IP address in public DNS
+1, see comment to womble's answer for reason :)
May
5
comment Private IP address in public DNS
+1, thank you for being a voice of sanity in all the FUD responses to this question. "Security risk" my lower dorsal regions, and seeing routing problems and DNS issues colluded into one knee-jerk "don't do it" reaction just makes me wonder about the competence of people running networks all over the place.
May
5
comment Private IP address in public DNS
That's all nice and true, but you haven't given an actual reason for why one should not publish RFC1918 addresses in DNS. You have just described what RFC1918 addresses are and that it's possible to not have a route to some of them. How is that different from any other IP number? It's possible to not have a route to 198.41.0.4 - does that mean it's wrong to publish 198.41.0.4 in DNS? DNS is a name resolution system. It has nothing to do with routing, the two are orthogonal. You're colluding two categories of problems, which basically amounts to FUD.
May
5
comment Private IP address in public DNS
That's certainly an option, but why? What does running an internal resolver or (much smarter) using something like BIND views gain you beside administrative overhead and maintenance burden? That's what I don't understand.
May
5
comment Private IP address in public DNS
Having RFC1918 addresses in the public DNS is for example superbly useful if you push routes to the internal networks through VPNs - that allows people to use their preferred DNS server and still resolve your internal names correctly.
May
5
comment Private IP address in public DNS
I would also like to know what "confusion" can arise. The only "confusion" I can think of is RFC1918 addresses in public NS or MX records, and that is a big fat error, not confusion. The security issue is a red herring, 90% of people will already have 192.168.1.0/24 and nobody will really bother to check DNS for more, and if you're bothered about leaking internal networks, have you checked your SMTP headers lately? Thought so.
May
5
comment Can I “register” python scripts to execute on Windows?
Leaving off .py is exactly what Jonathon was asking. And considering that he's using Cygwin, I assume he's quite familiar with changing shell file associations. And the Pythin Win32 installer already associates the required extensions with the Python interpreter.
May
4
comment Severe write performance problem
Glad to hear you figured it out - truth be told, I'd have expected LSI to mention stuff like this in big, bold letters on the third page of the manual. I can see why they're not enabling it by default (needs to be battery-backed, otherwise an otherwise minor data loss might turn into the loss of the entire array), but such severe performance degradation needs to be documented.
May
4
comment How to prevent / detect ARP poison rooting attacks?
Replaced the apr tag with arp-poisoning. My expectation for the apr tag would be Apache Portable Runtime.
May
4
comment Can I “register” python scripts to execute on Windows?
Nope, can't be done without patching bash, and maintaining a bash branch just to avoid typing .py or creating some symlinks borders on insanity :)
May
4
comment Can I “register” python scripts to execute on Windows?
Welcome. I'm using msys for my rather limited Win32 needs (I crosscompile mostly everything from Linux) and the two share common roots. I'll try to figure out a solution, and if I get it to work I'll leave a comment to the question and we can test it under Cygwin. I'd rather not install a cyg distribution at the moment, still too traumatized from last time :)
May
4
comment Can I “register” python scripts to execute on Windows?
Edit: Just reconfirmed. On both 2000 and XP tacking :.PY to the end of PATHEXT works like a charm, .py scripts run without requiring the extension or any alteration of the actual script itself. Of course, ensure you've added the Python install directory to the PATH.
May
4
comment Can I “register” python scripts to execute on Windows?
No, that actually applies to Windows NT. 2000 and up were fixed.
May
4
comment Is James stable for production use?
Might be an integration project. However, shipping a Java MTA when there are better alternatives is irresponsible to say the least. Writing a well performing and secure MTA is very, very hard and takes years. There is no way anyone has written a Java MTA that lives up to the quality of one of the established ones.