| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <200401240140.i0O1edbI006981@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> From: Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu (Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu) Subject: DOS all platforms On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 17:07:18 EST, James.Cupps@...pi.com said: > I actually saw the refresh issue kill a monitor about 6 years back. NT4.0 > can't remember the service pack level. It wasn't a virus or DOS hack though > it was a boneheaded admin. He then plugged that same machine (with the bad > refresh rates) into another monitor and blew it to. Then he got fired. To be fair, if you learned your trade since the advent of multisync monitors, you may not even be aware that once there were monitors too stupid to put up an "out of range" logo if the hsync/vsync was totally bogus. It's surprising that 6 years ago, the site had *two* monitors ancient enough to be lacking the circuitry to protect them from that error. They were probably aged enough that they needed replacing anyhow. This of course ties into the "user error" discussion on the other thread - is this an error that *any* of us could have made, because "You can't toast a multisync capable monitor that way"? Who here actually *checks* each monitor they plug in to make *sure* it's able to multisync? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 226 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20040123/f711b0d4/attachment.bin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists