[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45D26233.8030403@s0ftpj.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 02:13:23 +0100
From: KJKHyperion <hackbunny@...tpj.org>
To: Full-Disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: Torpark breaks with DEP enabled,
and how to break it further so that it works
coderman wrote:
>> Sorry, I'm a noted Windows fanboy and I'm not sure I find that a plus
> you must have w2k server, no WSAENOBUFS [0] hell for you! *g*
woe onto the unwary developer who uses select on Windows. It is merely a
concession to portability, not actually meant to be used. Seriously,
guys, we have had a good laugh about it. But it was all a joke. A prank!
Stop using it, k? No love lost, we hope
> in any case, i hope you are aware of which claims are actually
> supported by Torpark and which aren't. [1]
My counter"claim" is that Torpark is "crappy" and "bloated". I tolerate
it because I am "lazy".
I also seriously, earnestly cannot accept for a fact that nobody else
has noticed that it breaks with hard-DEP enabled
> that's sick dude! quit drinking the cool-aid before it's too late! :P
I used to be the proud owner of a Windows server that NATted a
PPP-over-LPT connection onto an ISDN line (inexplicably [!], RRAS didn't
appear to have been designed to support a scenario where you NAT a PPP
connection into another PPP connection.). A virtual Ethernet interface
(Microsoft Loopback) also somehow fit in the scheme, if I recall
correctly. Despite Microsoft's best intentions, the whole Rube Goldberg
actually worked
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists