|
SCO Site Down Today Again -- |
|
Tuesday, August 26 2003 @ 09:49 AM EDT
|
SCO Site Down Today Again -- But They Say it Wasn't an Attack
Whatever happened over the weekend, today's outage definitely was not an attack, according to a SCO spokesman:
"The Web site of embattled software maker The SCO Group Inc. was inaccessible again on Tuesday, fueling reports of another denial of service attack. . . .
"The outage prompted Netcraft to declare that SCO was again the target of a DoS attack. However, the outage was actually due to preventative measures taken by SCO and its hosting service to mitigate the effects of future attacks, according to company spokesman Marc Modersitzki."
As usual, the press isn't quite correct. Here's what Netcraft actually has up on its news site now:
"The SCO site was up for a few hours during business hours in Utah, but has since failed again. Many news sites carried the story that Eric Raymond had spoken to a group responsible for a Distributed Denial of Service attack on the www.sco.com site and that they agreed to stop. However it appears that this may have been a hoax, or they subsequently changed their minds, or another person decided to continue the attack."
Or, the one guess they didn't think of, SCO did it themselves. It's good that at least Netcraft made it clear that they were only guessing.
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 26 2003 @ 09:58 PM EDT |
Up or Down... it's nothing but a propaganda distribution center. ;) JustDave[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 26 2003 @ 10:18 PM EDT |
There is the quite real possiblity that some random script kiddies are just
trying to stir things up... They see a conflict, and generally are
anti-big-business in attitude... so they attack the obvious target... that and
the fact there is no obvious linux target. Me...[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 26 2003 @ 10:23 PM EDT |
Here we go round the mulberry bush... SCO down again!
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/performance?explain=0&mode_p=on&m
ode_u=off&mode_w=off&by=collector&errors=0&site=www.sco.com&site1=&sample=2&subm
it=Examine&range=5d&maxy=0 Belzecue[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 26 2003 @ 10:25 PM EDT |
D'Oh! sorry -- killed the window width. I hate that. Horizontal scrolling
sucks. PJ, if you can edit, replace the gargantuan URL above with its tiny
counterpart.
http://tinyurl.com/lbg4 Belzecue[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 26 2003 @ 10:39 PM EDT |
Well, I see that didn't work out well. : )
If I try again, it'll be worse, in all likelihood. Sorry everyone. Radio is a
challenge. Obviously I haven't got all
the quirks figured out, and you'll please just endure until we make the move. pj[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 26 2003 @ 11:25 PM EDT |
PJ -- could get yourself a Yahoo Group for the SCO Chronicles, maybe? The
traffic here warrants some big iron for message management. And I notice quite
a few SCO Yahoo Finance board members posting here. Would force all interested
parties to get a yahoo logon, of course [bummer].
Anyway, look forward to whatever glitzy, glammy, no-longer-gluggy** Groklaw
forums you are cooking up.
Cheers, Belz.
** This word does not exist according to my Collins English Dictionary.
Dictionary.com defines 'glug' as...
glug
v : make a gurgling sound as of liquid issuing from a bottle: "glasses
clinked...and the wine bottles glugged"- Gerald Durrell.
This, however, does not capture the true spirit of 'gluggy' as used here in
Australia. Typically, 'gluggy' indicates something goopy (here we go again),
sluggish, prone to fouling up the orifice through which it is attempting to
escape. Getting honey out of a squeeze bottle in winter is a fine example.
Three consecutive Indian curries is a not-so-good example. My use of the word
in regard to your comment forum is strictly limited to the window-width blowout
issue and is NOT an opinion about the quality, quantity, or viscosity of the
postings herein.
[Phew. Got out of that one rather well, no?] Belzecue[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 27 2003 @ 05:00 AM EDT |
http://www.techworld.com/news/index.cfm?fuseaction=displaynews&newsid=397
http
://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php?id=1725366517&fp=16&fpid=0
regarding:
<quote>(Question)If SCO doesn’t offer a license that would permit the
distribution of an in house customized Linux OS to internal data centers, what
is the value of correcting the infringement on the part of my end users when my
company as a whole is still infringing SCO’s intellectual property? What should
I do? (Answer) Consider migrating from an in house customized version of Linux
to a shrink wrap, off the shelf version of Linux or to an alternative operating
system. If you are unable to migrate, consider outsourcing the development of
the customized Linux distribution. </quote>
Repeat of previous thought: It seems to me SCO's cure for alleged
infringement is yet more alleged infringement ...either by some other
non-SCO Linux distributor, ...or by getting some third party to do the
infringement for you.
I am confused how that cures alleged
infringement - although it does put money in SCO's pocket - IANAL, so I'd
like to know is that a "good faith" effort? quatermass - SCO delenda est[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 27 2003 @ 05:00 AM EDT |
http://www.linux.org.uk/~taj/sco.ht
ml quatermass - SCO delenda est[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 27 2003 @ 06:24 AM EDT |
IANAL, but doesn't SCO's failure to identify 'infringing' code violate their
duty of mitigation
of damages? So they can't claim damages for the use of 'infringing' code
regardless. And trying to collect
damages from IBM and license fees from end user is double
dipping, is it not? Given this, it sure seems like extortion. Larry[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 27 2003 @ 07:01 AM EDT |
sco.com down again this morning Kastlemaster[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|