Prev: FAQ 5.4 How do I delete the last N lines from a file?
Next: FAQ 4.61 How can I always keep my hash sorted?
From: John W. Krahn on 19 May 2010 13:40
Tad McClellan wrote:
> Uno <merrilljensen(a)q.com> wrote:
>
>> my $socket = new IO::Socket::INET (PeerAddr => $remote_host,
>> PeerPort => $remote_port,
>> Proto => "tcp",
>> Type => SOCK_STREAM)
>> or die "scheisse mal\n";
>>
>> print $socket "data\n";
>
>
> This one is:
>
> print FILEHANDLE LIST
>
>
>> my $line = <$socket>;
>>
>> print $line;
>
> This one is:
>
> print LIST
>
>
>> q1) Can someone say a few words about the differences between the print
>> statements.
>
>
> perldoc -f print
>
>
>> Apparently, one sends a message to another machine,
>
>
> FILEHANDLE may be a scalar variable name, in which case the variable
> contains the name of or a reference to the filehandle
>
>
>> and the
>> other sends a message to mine.
>
>
> If FILEHANDLE is omitted, prints by default to standard output

If FILEHANDLE is omitted, prints to the currently selected
filehandle which by default is standard output.

perldoc -f select



John
--
The programmer is fighting against the two most
destructive forces in the universe: entropy and
human stupidity. -- Damian Conway
From: Ilya Zakharevich on 19 May 2010 15:16
On 2010-05-19, Uno <merrilljensen(a)q.com> wrote:
> I guess I don't know who an "attacker" is. I see movies where any
> computer capability can exist, like Seth Green controlling traffic in
> Los Angeles in "The Italian Job." I admire Seth's genius (Robot
> Chicken), but don't think the situation possible.

> What would it take for another entity to suck up all my packets that I
> sent to q.com?

Google for it; it must be discussed out to the death. (IIRC MIB do
not need to suck up anything; all they need is to reply EARLIER than
your intended target - which is not hard given that they are IN
BETWEEN.)

Hope this helps,
Ilya
From: sln on 19 May 2010 15:36
On Wed, 19 May 2010 19:16:45 +0000 (UTC), Ilya Zakharevich <nospam-abuse(a)ilyaz.org> wrote:

>On 2010-05-19, Uno <merrilljensen(a)q.com> wrote:
>> I guess I don't know who an "attacker" is. I see movies where any
>> computer capability can exist, like Seth Green controlling traffic in
>> Los Angeles in "The Italian Job." I admire Seth's genius (Robot
>> Chicken), but don't think the situation possible.
>
>> What would it take for another entity to suck up all my packets that I
>> sent to q.com?
>
>Google for it; it must be discussed out to the death. (IIRC MIB do
>not need to suck up anything; all they need is to reply EARLIER than
>your intended target - which is not hard given that they are IN
>BETWEEN.)
>

Such things are criminal, how are we to protect ourselves.

-sln
From: Uno on 24 May 2010 23:32
On 5/19/2010 12:36 PM, sln(a)netherlands.com wrote:
> On Wed, 19 May 2010 19:16:45 +0000 (UTC), Ilya Zakharevich<nospam-abuse(a)ilyaz.org> wrote:
>
>> On 2010-05-19, Uno<merrilljensen(a)q.com> wrote:
>>> I guess I don't know who an "attacker" is. I see movies where any
>>> computer capability can exist, like Seth Green controlling traffic in
>>> Los Angeles in "The Italian Job." I admire Seth's genius (Robot
>>> Chicken), but don't think the situation possible.
>>
>>> What would it take for another entity to suck up all my packets that I
>>> sent to q.com?
>>
>> Google for it; it must be discussed out to the death. (IIRC MIB do
>> not need to suck up anything; all they need is to reply EARLIER than
>> your intended target - which is not hard given that they are IN
>> BETWEEN.)
>>
>
> Such things are criminal, how are we to protect ourselves.

I like to bore them.
--
Uno

From: Ilya Zakharevich on 25 May 2010 02:07
On 2010-05-19, Uno <merrilljensen(a)q.com> wrote:
> I guess I don't know who an "attacker" is. I see movies where any
> computer capability can exist, like Seth Green controlling traffic in
> Los Angeles in "The Italian Job." I admire Seth's genius (Robot
> Chicken), but don't think the situation possible.

In my other reply to this message, I forgot about another example with
"real life Italian Job". According to comp.risks, there exists an
available-off-the-shelf router which does exactly what people fear all
the time, but think is technically impossible:

a) this router is advertised as having something like "smart firewall";

b1) to implement this "smartness", the install program for the
router inserts a fake certificate into the trust chain which
allows the router to impersonate any site;

b2) using this "breach of authentication trust", the router DOES
impersonate all the SSL targets, and decrypts all the
communications passing through it. Then the firewall acts
basing on the decrypted contents.

Hope this helps,
Ilya
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: FAQ 5.4 How do I delete the last N lines from a file?
Next: FAQ 4.61 How can I always keep my hash sorted?