I now have an 11,500-line hosts file.
( Started reviewing my old one and couldn't stop - ended up increasing
it by 10x after about 2 days' work trawling through the Security
sites)

My bandwidth is no longer being pummelled by advertising and other
crap I don't want to see.

Especially useful to nail that 2% of PCs on your network that use 25%
of your internet bandwidth......stick my Hosts file on them to sort
them out.......

Here is a tiny snippet: (If you want the whole thing....I can ftp it
to you if you want, or something...I don't imagine 11,500 lines would
go down too well here....)

ads.vitalix.net #[images.accessmedia.tv][Trojan.Muvipaz]
ads.vnuemedia.com
ads.wanadooregie.com
ads.weather.ca
ads.weather.com
ads.web.aol.com
ads.web.cs.com
ads.web.de
ads.web21.com
ads.webads360.com #[IE-SpyAd]
ads.webattack.com
ads.webfever.kadserver.com
ads.webheat.com
ads.webhosting.info
ads.webmastersdirect.com
ads.webnet.advance.net
ads.webshots.com
ads.websponsors.com
ads.whi.co.nz
ads.winsite.com
ads.wunderground.com #[SecuritySpace.WebBug]
ads.x10.com #[SpySweeper.Spy.Cookie]
ads.x10.net
ads.xbiz.com
ads.xtra.co.nz
ads.yadio.com
ads.yazzle.net
ads.ynot.com
ads.yourfreedvds.com
ads.zdnet.com
ads.zebest-3000.net.kadserver.com
ads.zedo.com #[McAfee.Cookie-Zedo]
ads.zone-media.com #[Troj/Swizzor-CN][TROJ_SWIZZOR.EJ]
ads.z-quest.com
ads0.revenue.net
ads001.webwombat.com.au
ads05.bpath.com
ads05.freecity.de
ads06.bpath.com
ads07.bpath.com #[SunBelt.BPath.com]
ads08.bpath.com
ads09.bpath.com
ads1.activeagent.at

On 2 Mar 2007 01:32:54 -0800, "Arfur" <arthur_brain1 [at] yahoo.co.uk>
exclaimed:

>I now have an 11,500-line hosts file.
>( Started reviewing my old one and couldn't stop - ended up increasing
>it by 10x after about 2 days' work trawling through the Security
>sites)

Wow, you've got WAY too much time on your hands...


--

Stupidest Comment of the Year Award:

"People should take responsibility for their actions"

- (Leftist) Matty F (7/1/2007), when explaining it was actually the quadbiker's
fault that he was brutally murdered by Graeme Burton. According to Matty F,
it was his fault that he was in the wrong place at the wrong time...



Best Rant of the Year Award:

"Interesting to see the Green bastard even at a supermarket shopping, instead
of living off the land growing his own food. At least he's helped to keep the
cogs and polution of industry going by shopping at supermarkets which sell
products from large filthy factories [that] use stinking diesel trucks
polluting the damn countryside just to get the goods to Nandor's favourite
supermarket. Well done Nandor you two faced tax paid good for nothing bastard"

- E. Scrooge (1/3/2007), a little unhappy about the Green's proposal to ban
supermarket bags...

Arfur <arthur_brain1 [at] yahoo.co.uk> Thou very devil incardinate. Thou most
simple clown. Thou meanest groom. Thou loggerheaded, grease-covered
devil incarnate. Ye stage-whispered and ye trilled:

> I now have an 11,500-line hosts file.
> ( Started reviewing my old one and couldn't stop - ended up increasing
> it by 10x after about 2 days' work trawling through the Security
> sites)

2 days trawling through the security sites, huh...

> My bandwidth is no longer being pummelled by advertising and other
> crap I don't want to see.
>
> Especially useful to nail that 2% of PCs on your network that use 25%
> of your internet bandwidth......stick my Hosts file on them to sort
> them out.......
>
> Here is a tiny snippet: (If you want the whole thing....I can ftp it
> to you if you want, or something...I don't imagine 11,500 lines would
> go down too well here....)
>
> ads.vitalix.net #[images.accessmedia.tv][Trojan.Muvipaz]

<SNIP>

http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.zip

# This MVPS HOSTS file is a free download from: #
# http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/ #
# #

<minor snip>

127.0.0.1 localhost

#start of lines added by WinHelp2002
# [Misc A - Z]
127.0.0.1 ad.a8.net
127.0.0.1 asy.a8ww.net

<skipped, over 14600 lines>

127.0.0.1 www.mommaporn.com
127.0.0.1 www.pokemonporn.us #[Zango]
127.0.0.1 www.wwe-divas.org
127.0.0.1 servedby.xcelltech.com
127.0.0.1 www.xcelltech.com
#end of lines added by WinHelp2002

14636 lines. Less than 1 second to download.

Dumbfuck.

--
alt.usenet.kooks - Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker:
September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.

Vescere puter subgalia meis.

"Now I know what it is. Now I know what it means when an
alt.usenet.kook x-post shows up."
AOK in news:ermdlu$nli$1 [at] registered.motzarella.org

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Arfur wrote:

<snipped>

You seem to be out of control here with this cross posting.

Mr. Arnold <"Mr. Arnold" [at] Arnold.COM> Thou skainsmate. Thou inbreed. Thou
mad mustachio purple-hued maltworm. Thou rotten, dense anointed
sovereign of sighs and groans. Ye expectorated and ye fabricated:

> Arfur wrote:
>
> <snipped>
>
> You seem to be out of control here with this cross posting.

...said the fuckwit cross-poster.

<chucks bone>
FETCH!

--
alt.usenet.kooks - Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker:
September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.

Vescere puter subgalia meis.

"Now I know what it is. Now I know what it means when an
alt.usenet.kook x-post shows up."
AOK in news:ermdlu$nli$1 [at] registered.motzarella.org

Arfur wrote:
> I now have an 11,500-line hosts file.
> ( Started reviewing my old one and couldn't stop - ended up increasing
> it by 10x after about 2 days' work trawling through the Security
> sites)
>
> My bandwidth is no longer being pummelled by advertising and other
> crap I don't want to see.
>
> Especially useful to nail that 2% of PCs on your network that use 25%
> of your internet bandwidth......stick my Hosts file on them to sort
> them out.......
>
> Here is a tiny snippet: (If you want the whole thing....I can ftp it
> to you if you want, or something...I don't imagine 11,500 lines would
> go down too well here....)
>
> ads.vitalix.net #[images.accessmedia.tv][Trojan.Muvipaz]
> ads.vnuemedia.com
> ads.wanadooregie.com
> ads.weather.ca
> ads.weather.com
> ads.web.aol.com
> ads.web.cs.com
> ads.web.de
> ads.web21.com
> ads.webads360.com #[IE-SpyAd]
> ads.webattack.com
> ads.webfever.kadserver.com
> ads.webheat.com
> ads.webhosting.info
> ads.webmastersdirect.com
> ads.webnet.advance.net
> ads.webshots.com
> ads.websponsors.com
> ads.whi.co.nz
> ads.winsite.com
> ads.wunderground.com #[SecuritySpace.WebBug]
> ads.x10.com #[SpySweeper.Spy.Cookie]
> ads.x10.net
> ads.xbiz.com
> ads.xtra.co.nz
> ads.yadio.com
> ads.yazzle.net
> ads.ynot.com
> ads.yourfreedvds.com
> ads.zdnet.com
> ads.zebest-3000.net.kadserver.com
> ads.zedo.com #[McAfee.Cookie-Zedo]
> ads.zone-media.com #[Troj/Swizzor-CN][TROJ_SWIZZOR.EJ]
> ads.z-quest.com
> ads0.revenue.net
> ads001.webwombat.com.au
> ads05.bpath.com
> ads05.freecity.de
> ads06.bpath.com
> ads07.bpath.com #[SunBelt.BPath.com]
> ads08.bpath.com
> ads09.bpath.com
> ads1.activeagent.at
>

You really a DNS server like (Gasp) Bind or (Double Gasp) MS DNS
Just block the entire domain bpath.com, the parasites constantly
change the names of servers

Arfur wrote:
> I now have an 11,500-line hosts file.
> ( Started reviewing my old one and couldn't stop - ended up increasing
> it by 10x after about 2 days' work trawling through the Security
> sites)
>
> My bandwidth is no longer being pummelled by advertising and other
> crap I don't want to see.
>
> Especially useful to nail that 2% of PCs on your network that use 25%
> of your internet bandwidth......stick my Hosts file on them to sort
> them out.......
>
> Here is a tiny snippet: (If you want the whole thing....I can ftp it
> to you if you want, or something...I don't imagine 11,500 lines would
> go down too well here....)
>
> ads.vitalix.net #[images.accessmedia.tv][Trojan.Muvipaz]
> ads.vnuemedia.com
> ads.wanadooregie.com
> ads.weather.ca
> ads.weather.com
> ads.web.aol.com
> ads.web.cs.com
> ads.web.de
> ads.web21.com
> ads.webads360.com #[IE-SpyAd]
> ads.webattack.com
> ads.webfever.kadserver.com
> ads.webheat.com
> ads.webhosting.info
> ads.webmastersdirect.com
> ads.webnet.advance.net
> ads.webshots.com
> ads.websponsors.com
> ads.whi.co.nz
> ads.winsite.com
> ads.wunderground.com #[SecuritySpace.WebBug]
> ads.x10.com #[SpySweeper.Spy.Cookie]
> ads.x10.net
> ads.xbiz.com
> ads.xtra.co.nz
> ads.yadio.com
> ads.yazzle.net
> ads.ynot.com
> ads.yourfreedvds.com
> ads.zdnet.com
> ads.zebest-3000.net.kadserver.com
> ads.zedo.com #[McAfee.Cookie-Zedo]
> ads.zone-media.com #[Troj/Swizzor-CN][TROJ_SWIZZOR.EJ]
> ads.z-quest.com
> ads0.revenue.net
> ads001.webwombat.com.au
> ads05.bpath.com
> ads05.freecity.de
> ads06.bpath.com
> ads07.bpath.com #[SunBelt.BPath.com]
> ads08.bpath.com
> ads09.bpath.com
> ads1.activeagent.at
>

You really need a DNS server like (Gasp) Bind or (Double Gasp) MS DNS
Just block the entire domain bpath.com, the parasites constantly
change the names of servers

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Vegetable Plow a hag wrote:

<I am not even going to bother with K-Hag.>

<You two homeless, sleepless and tired hags posting from a public
library, both of you lunatics need to pull some medicated Cat Chow out
of your purses and eat. Then you two hags after you're medicated on the
Cat Chow can lay down and go to sleep for awhile. Maybe, you both should
eat a couple of cases of the medicated chow and end your worthless lives.>

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Kadaitcha Man wrote:

> 14636 lines. Less than 1 second to download.

> Dumbfuck.

That list contains duplications.

Mine doesn't.

Have a look at

http://www.bluetack.co.uk/forums/index.php

"Arfur" <arthur_brain1 [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote in news:1172874206.635202.210070
[at] j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com:

> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>
>> 14636 lines. Less than 1 second to download.
>
>> Dumbfuck.
>
> That list contains duplications.
>
> Mine doesn't.
>
>

I wouldn't worry too much, k-man is a known usenet troll...


--
Dustin Cook
Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool - V2.2
web: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk - email:
bughunter.dustin [at] gmail.com.removethis
Pad: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/pad.xml

Arfur <arthur_brain1 [at] yahoo.co.uk> Thou waxy-faced patched fool. Thou
empty-headed tassel of a prodigal's purse. Thou barren-spirited fellow.
Priests must become mockers, if they shall encounter such ridiculous
subjects as you. Ye secreted and ye mewled:

> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>
>> 14636 lines. Less than 1 second to download.
>
>> Dumbfuck.
>
> That list contains duplications.
>
> Mine doesn't.

So fucking what? You're dumb enough to spend two full days combing websites
to build a fucking hosts file just to avoid a few duplicates. And when you
download one in less than one second that's already made, you're fucking mad
enough to check through it for dupes.

You're a fucking wackjob. <--- That was the point being made originally, and
it's the point being reasserted now.

--
alt.usenet.kooks - Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker:
September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.

Vescere puter subgalia meis.

"Now I know what it is. Now I know what it means when an
alt.usenet.kook x-post shows up."
AOK in news:ermdlu$nli$1 [at] registered.motzarella.org

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Dustin Cook <spamfilterineffect.see.sig [at] nowhere.com> Thou foreign
recreant. Thou art like the harpy, which, to betray, dost with thine
angels face, seize with thine eagle's talons. Thou hedge-born fat
friend. Thou putrid Nero. Ye rapped and ye threw up:

> "Kadaitcha Man" <nntp.news [at] gmail.com> wrote in news:q9g182$cu3$f [at] full-
> gorged-jawbreakers.org:
>
>> Rhonda Lea Kirk <rhondalea [at] gmail.com> Thou noble goose. O slave, of
>> no more trust than love that's hir'd. Thou sworn brothers in
>> filching. Thou gravedigger. Ye heaved and ye piped:
>>
>>> Dustin Cook wrote:
>>>> "Arfur" <arthur_brain1 [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote in
>>>> news:1172874206.635202.210070 [at] j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com:
>>>>
>>>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> 14636 lines. Less than 1 second to download.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dumbfuck.
>>>>>
>>>>> That list contains duplications.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mine doesn't.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I wouldn't worry too much, k-man is a known usenet troll...
>>>
>>> ...whose site--kadaitcha.cx--counter currently registers 2,071,183
>>> hits, whereas yours registers...how many, Dustin? Right around
>>> 10,000, right?
>>
>> That's 2,071,183 unique visitors. The hit count is way above that ;->
>
> How long has your site been online? The uk site has been up for less
> than 1 year. The site is specific to one particular program, whereas
> your site is a general help site.
>
> Your comparing apples to oranges.

In your dreams fuckwad. Rhonda's point is about your clear implication that
trolling on usenet somehow lowers the technical worth of information on the
internet, you stupid, brainless, wet fart stain on an Arab's underpants.
Bringing that together with my point that you were gloating earlier, and at
the same time lying through your false teeth, about your worse than shitty
sub-10000 hits, you can't now go and conveniently move the goalposts by
trying to insert a comparison of site content to try and get out of the
fucking really deep hole you dug your very self, filled it with your
stinking, maggot-infested lies and promptly jumped into, cuntard. You're not
smart enough by a country mile to get away with it.

news:ef91mu$rtl$1 [at] emma.aioe.org
Local: Thurs, Sep 28 2006 10:58 am

news:1158786571.219819.64880 [at] d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com
Local: Thurs, Sep 21 2006 8:09 am

The smart reader of those posts linked to above will note that the lying
claim you made on Sep 21 2006 was for 300+ hits a day "and growing", then a
week later, suddenly forgetting the lie you told a week earlier, you then
make a claim for 200+ hits a day. You can't even lie straight in bed,
Dustfart, you fuck-knuckled moron.

And it is also you who squeals, like a stuck piglet and quoted up there,
that technical information conveyed by someone else is rendered worthless
merely because you were stupid enough to troll yourself into a frothing
frenzy.

I get more page views in one poor-traffic day than you get in a year, yet it
is you who prances around usenet squealing like a prepubescent girl who just
got her first trainer bra, sniggering to anyone who will listen to you,
"hehehe 9500 hits!".

--
alt.usenet.kooks - Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker:
September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.

Vescere puter subgalia meis.

"Now I know what it is. Now I know what it means when an
alt.usenet.kook x-post shows up."
AOK in news:ermdlu$nli$1 [at] registered.motzarella.org

Dustin Cook <spamfilterineffect.see.sig [at] nowhere.com> Thou hag of all
despite. You ratcatcher. Thou hollow heart. Thou midnight hag. Ye
disputed and ye yipped:

> Far Canal <me [at] privacy.net> wrote in
> news:MPG.20544e8133844ab98a2ac [at] news.readfreenews.net:
>
>> Dustin Cook wrote
>>
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ...whose site--kadaitcha.cx--counter currently registers 2,071,183
>>>>> hits, whereas yours registers...how many, Dustin? Right around
>>>>> 10,000, right?
>>>>
>>>> That's 2,071,183 unique visitors. The hit count is way above that
>>>> ;->
>>>
>>> How long has your site been online? The uk site has been up for less
>>> than 1 year. The site is specific to one particular program, whereas
>>> your site is a general help site.
>>>
>>
>> Let's get this right.
>> Kadaitcha Man runs a well known & respected site that gets thousands
>> of hits daily, because it has enabled thousands of people to solve
>> their computer problems.
>
> As do other sites... I don't see the point.. Unless K-man wants to
> take credit for every item on his site?
>
>> He kicks you up the arse for some reason, which has been lost in the
>> depths of Google.
>
> I'm sorry, you should re-read the threads then. BugHunter is by no
> means, a trojan,
>
>> And he's the idiot?
>> Sorry chum, it doesn't add up.
>
> I think your reading more into what I actually said...

BWAHAHAHAAHAHA! That's a fucking joke coming from you, you fucking joke.

--
alt.usenet.kooks - Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker:
September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.

Vescere puter subgalia meis.

"Now I know what it is. Now I know what it means when an
alt.usenet.kook x-post shows up."
AOK in news:ermdlu$nli$1 [at] registered.motzarella.org

Kadaitcha Man wrote:
> Arfur <arthur_brain1 [at] yahoo.co.uk>

> > That list contains duplications.

> > Mine doesn't.

> So fucking what?

Er, so some of us have higher standards than others?

Am I right?

> You're dumb enough to spend two full days combing websites
> to build a fucking hosts file just to avoid a few duplicates.

Yes.
In IT, precision, attention to detail, and high-quality work is very
important.

Please let me know if you would like some coaching in providing
quality work.

Sebastian Gottschalk wrote:
> Arfur wrote:
>
> > Kadaitcha Man wrote:
> >
> >> 14636 lines. Less than 1 second to download.
> >
> >> Dumbfuck.

> > That list contains duplications.

> > Mine doesn't.

> Your lists contain entries. Mine doesn't.

Therefore my list is functional, yours is useless.

I win.

Icy Wiener wrote:

> You really a DNS server like (Gasp) Bind or (Double Gasp) MS DNS
> Just block the entire domain bpath.com, the parasites constantly
> change the names of servers

Sure, for some domains, yes - poison the whole thing.

For other domains, eg Yahoo, you want to be able to get Yahoo, but
intercept any requests for the ads servers.

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

"Sebastian Gottschalk" <seppi [at] seppig.de> wrote in message
news:5582g0F23m3tdU1 [at] mid.dfncis.de...
> Arfur wrote:
>
>>> You're dumb enough to spend two full days combing websites
>>> to build a fucking hosts file just to avoid a few duplicates.
>>
>> Yes.
>> In IT, precision, attention to detail, and high-quality work is very
>> important.
>
> But you build a list at all. This is anything but high-quality work.

K man has had a name and gender change in swinging Germany??????

Sebastian Gottschalk wrote:
> Arfur wrote:

> > Sure, for some domains, yes - poison the whole thing.
> >
> > For other domains, eg Yahoo, you want to be able to get Yahoo, but
> > intercept any requests for the ads servers.

> Then do this at the application level.

Why would I want to be wasting Software Engineering time when I can
simply copy lines to a text file?

Are you a spotty 18-year-old with too much time (and other stuff) on
your hands?

> Changing the HOSTS file requires
> administrative privileges,

Der! How do you think I'm going to change it? Log onto each machine
individually and use Explorer?
You really are a clown....

> craps up the DNS resolver and slows down the
> system,

Crap, crap. In fact it speeds it up as it cuts down dramatically on
the amount of waiting around for HTTP requests to be served.

> applies with no distinction of the application layer protocol, is

We're talking about stopping dimwit users from hoovering up a
network's bandwidth by surfing crappy sites full of ads when they
should be working - do you really thing I am concerned with anything
other than http?

> extremely ineffective,

Wrong. By doctoring the hosts file on a Group of about 200 users whose
common-factor was excessive consumption of bandwidth, I have VASTLY
decreased the congestion on our Internet pipe for the other 12,000
users.

Maybe you can get out of your stinky bedroom and have a go at the real-
world some time?

> and (even worse) doesn't work at all for any
> application using SOCKOPT_NO_HOSTS.

Well gee, I wonder how many of my 12,000 dimwit public-servant users
have managed to hack their Microsoft Internet Explorer to bypass use
of the Hosts file......What do you reckon, Fritz?

> Only an idiot with no fucking clue what he's doing would abuse the HOSTS
> file for such a purpose.

I'll defer to your demonstrated expertise on the matter of "idiot[s]
with no fucking clue".

Meanwhile, my network bandwidth is greatly improved thanks to my Hosts
file cutting out loads of crap.
Of course it didn't cut you out, but I wasn't claiming it was
perfect....

Arfur wrote:
> Sebastian Gottschalk wrote:
>
>

<snipped>

>>Only an idiot with no fucking clue what he's doing would abuse the HOSTS
>>file for such a purpose.

LOL, I think that about covers it here with the HOSTS as some kind of
magic bullet prevention solution. I guess the OP has never heard of a
proxy application sitting at the gateway preventing the user from
accessing unauthorized sites on the Internet.

Sebastian, you should just leave it alone. <g>

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Sebastian Gottschalk wrote:
> Maximum Dog wrote:
>
>
>>>>Only an idiot with no fucking clue what he's doing would abuse the HOSTS
>>>>file for such a purpose.
>>
>>LOL, I think that about covers it here with the HOSTS as some kind of
>>magic bullet prevention solution. I guess the OP has never heard of a
>>proxy application sitting at the gateway preventing the user from
>>accessing unauthorized sites on the Internet.
>
>
> I wouldn't even go that far... just let the webbrowser do it. I mean, it
> already has the entire website parsed and transformed into a DOM tree. It's
> way easier to simply select all relevant elements, select their
> SRC/HREF/DATA attribute and change their values such that requests are
> never created in first place.

I doubt that the OP knows what a Document Object Model is about.

Sebastian Gottschalk wrote:
> Arfur wrote:
>
> > Sebastian Gottschalk wrote:

> >> and (even worse) doesn't work at all for any
> >> application using SOCKOPT_NO_HOSTS.

> > Well gee, I wonder how many of my 12,000 dimwit public-servant users
> > have managed to hack their Microsoft Internet Explorer to bypass use
> > of the Hosts file......What do you reckon, Fritz?

> Interesting... by naming one application which doesn't use SOCKOPT_NO_HOSTS
> you claim that every application is alike? What do you reckon, Heinz?

....because my 12,000 public servants use Internet Explorer to get to
the internet...why would I waste time considering your nerdy
objections which have zero applicability to a normal corporate
network?

When I look at my firewall, 100% of connection requests to crappy ad
servers, spyware sites and other wastes of my bandwidth are http or
https, of course - what do you think normal computer users do with
their time?
Sit around their spoof-stinky nerdrooms frigging with software in
order to achieve completely pointless connections using pointless
applications to do it with?

If you have no practical experience of supporting a real-world
network, why do you embarrass yourself by demonstrating your
ineptitude in this public forum?

A bet you even own an Apple Mac.......

Maximum Dog wrote:

> LOL, I think that about covers it here with the HOSTS as some kind of
> magic bullet prevention solution. I guess the OP has never heard of a
> proxy application sitting at the gateway preventing the user from
> accessing unauthorized sites on the Internet.

Oh, gee, I guess I'll go out and spend $10k on such an appliance...

On the other hand, by copying my hosts file to the most bandwidth-
wasting 200 PCs on my network, I reduce bandwidth-wasting
dramatically....AT NO COST, without needing yet another server on the
network, and without having to reconfigure my WAN network access.

WHo are these idiots??????

God forbid anybody gives them a job in IT - they could do some real
damage.....

Sebastian Gottschalk wrote:
> Arfur wrote:
>
> > Sebastian Gottschalk wrote:

> >> and (even worse) doesn't work at all for any
> >> application using SOCKOPT_NO_HOSTS.

> > Well gee, I wonder how many of my 12,000 dimwit public-servant users
> > have managed to hack their Microsoft Internet Explorer to bypass use
> > of the Hosts file......What do you reckon, Fritz?

> Interesting... by naming one application which doesn't use SOCKOPT_NO_HOSTS
> you claim that every application is alike? What do you reckon, Heinz?

....because my 12,000 public servants use Internet Explorer to get to
the internet...why would I waste time considering your nerdy
objections which have zero applicability to a normal corporate
network?

When I look at my firewall, 100% of connection requests to crappy ad
servers, spyware sites and other wastes of my bandwidth are http or
https, of course - what do you think normal computer users do with
their time?
Sit around their spoof-stinky nerdrooms frigging with software in
order to achieve completely pointless connections using pointless
applications to do it with?

If you have no practical experience of supporting a real-world
network, why do you embarrass yourself by demonstrating your
ineptitude in this public forum?

A bet you even own an Apple Mac.......

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 21:51:37 -0700, Arfur wrote:

> Maximum Dog wrote:
>
>> LOL, I think that about covers it here with the HOSTS as some kind of
>> magic bullet prevention solution. I guess the OP has never heard of a
>> proxy application sitting at the gateway preventing the user from
>> accessing unauthorized sites on the Internet.
>
> Oh, gee, I guess I'll go out and spend $10k on such an appliance...
>
> On the other hand, by copying my hosts file to the most bandwidth-
> wasting 200 PCs on my network, I reduce bandwidth-wasting
> dramatically....AT NO COST, without needing yet another server on the
> network, and without having to reconfigure my WAN network access.
>
> WHo are these idiots??????
>
> God forbid anybody gives them a job in IT - they could do some real
> damage.....

I design and maintain secure networks for a living - while the HOST file
works, it's got a lot of flaws and it is not free, it takes time to
maintain and it takes time to keep people from working around it.

A typical appliance to protect you from that type of activity and many
others runs about $3500 for your number of nodes (not knowing your public
connection size I guessed at larger than a single T1) and that includes
the web blocking service to limit access to content by type.

As an exmaple, we've increased productivity almost 30% over
pre-firewall/blocking levels at most places we've setup, and the
maintenance costs have all decreased since so many other malware threats
were also reduced - the units pay for installation and updates in less
than 6 months in most cases.

SG is almost a waste to talk with - he's got no real world experience and
has not real world solutions.

--
Want to know what PCBUTTS1 is really about?
*** WARNING - these links contain foul/pornographic content of an
abusive nature created by PCBUTTS1 and still hosted on his public
website ***
http://www.pcbutts1.com/rlk/rlk.htm ,
http://www.pcbutts1.com/license.htm ,
http://www.pcbutts1.com/downloads/max.htm ,
http://www.pcbutts1.com/downloads/mpv.htm ,
http://www.pcbutts1.com/downloads/wtcpcb.htm ,
http://www.pcbutts1.com/cracks.htm ,
http://www.pcbutts1.com/Loutheasshole.htm
All while spamming his company website at: http://www.seedsv.com

Sebastian Gottschalk wrote:
> Arfur wrote:
>
> > Maximum Dog wrote:
> >
> >> LOL, I think that about covers it here with the HOSTS as some kind of
> >> magic bullet prevention solution. I guess the OP has never heard of a
> >> proxy application sitting at the gateway preventing the user from
> >> accessing unauthorized sites on the Internet.
> >
> > Oh, gee, I guess I'll go out and spend $10k on such an appliance...
> >
> > On the other hand, by copying my hosts file to the most bandwidth-
> > wasting 200 PCs on my network, I reduce bandwidth-wasting
> > dramatically....AT NO COST, without needing yet another server on the
> > network, and without having to reconfigure my WAN network access.

> And with just introducing a fackload of management issues, security issues
> and problems.

Actually, it introduced *no* issues, reduced bandwidth consumption and
increased productivity in a number of people who were spending far too
much time on the net.

....but you'd have to have some *practical* experience of these matters
to know that, which is precisely why I am sharing my wisdom and
knowledge with you dweebs.

Sebastian Gottschalk wrote:
> Arfur wrote:
>
> > Maximum Dog wrote:
> >
> >> LOL, I think that about covers it here with the HOSTS as some kind of
> >> magic bullet prevention solution. I guess the OP has never heard of a
> >> proxy application sitting at the gateway preventing the user from
> >> accessing unauthorized sites on the Internet.
> >
> > Oh, gee, I guess I'll go out and spend $10k on such an appliance...
> >
> > On the other hand, by copying my hosts file to the most bandwidth-
> > wasting 200 PCs on my network, I reduce bandwidth-wasting
> > dramatically....AT NO COST, without needing yet another server on the
> > network, and without having to reconfigure my WAN network access.

> And with just introducing a fackload of management issues, security issues
> and problems.

Actually, it introduced *no* issues or problems (in fact I can't begin
to imagine what sort of issues it is you are dreaming up), reduced
bandwidth consumption and increased productivity in a number of people
who were spending far too much time on the net.

....but you'd have to have some *practical* experience of these matters
to know that, which is precisely why I am sharing my wisdom and
knowledge with you dweebs.

Leythos wrote:

> I design and maintain secure networks for a living - while the HOST file
> works, it's got a lot of flaws and it is not free, it takes time to
> maintain and it takes time to keep people from working around it.

I don't worry about the <1% of people who figure out a way around it.
I'm just looking at the big picture, which is to effect a quick
measurable reduction bandwidth being wasted on ad-servers, etc...

I know it isn't elegant, clever, or foolproof, but maintaining it
isn't a problem.
I can think of three ways to keep it up-to-date:
- adding a single copy line to their log-in script
- dropping a simple copy script into their \tasks folder
- copying direct to their hosts file.

The 2nd two options can be done by keeping tabs (from your firewall
logs) of the IP addresses sucking down the most crap in a simple text
file, then using a simple script to copy your hosts file over to each
one.

> A typical appliance to protect you from that type of activity and many
> others runs about $3500 for your number of nodes (not knowing your public
> connection size I guessed at larger than a single T1) and that includes
> the web blocking service to limit access to content by type.

We trialled Bluecoat, but in the end the Boss wouldn't fork out for
it.

We trialled LANDesk (which has additional uses such as licensing
compliance, but gives you total control over the desktop in a very
automated way - My final trial I ran on it was "Discover all MP3,
etc.. files on the network"....and then the trial management PC was
retired & became the office jukebox....hehe), but they wanted
something like $1,000,000 to put it in (a lot of that was licensing)
and the Boss wouldn't fork out for it.

Something like Websense would have been good - it's a bit of a blunt
instrument but it can really discourage 'net surfing, which is good.
Again, the Boss wouldn't even consider this, due to cost.

> As an exmaple, we've increased productivity almost 30% over
> pre-firewall/blocking levels at most places we've setup, and the
> maintenance costs have all decreased since so many other malware threats
> were also reduced - the units pay for installation and updates in less
> than 6 months in most cases.

Yeah, we had already had to manually scrape out the malware since it
exploded in late 2003, using the firewall to identify it all
primarily, seeing as the Boss wouldn't fork out for anything else.
He wouldn't even agree to send a donation to the makers of Adaware &
Spybot when we suggested it.

At least they agreed to aggressively hunt down and replace all the
Windows98 PCs in 2005 - I think by the end of that year there were
less than 500 of them left.
....then we just had to deal with all the Users complaining that we had
taken control of their desktops and denied them admin rights.....

On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 14:13:48 -0700, Arfur wrote:

> Leythos wrote:
>
>> I design and maintain secure networks for a living - while the HOST file
>> works, it's got a lot of flaws and it is not free, it takes time to
>> maintain and it takes time to keep people from working around it.
>
> I don't worry about the <1% of people who figure out a way around it.
> I'm just looking at the big picture, which is to effect a quick
> measurable reduction bandwidth being wasted on ad-servers, etc...
>
> I know it isn't elegant, clever, or foolproof, but maintaining it
> isn't a problem.
> I can think of three ways to keep it up-to-date:
> - adding a single copy line to their log-in script
> - dropping a simple copy script into their \tasks folder
> - copying direct to their hosts file.
>
> The 2nd two options can be done by keeping tabs (from your firewall
> logs) of the IP addresses sucking down the most crap in a simple text
> file, then using a simple script to copy your hosts file over to each
> one.
>
>> A typical appliance to protect you from that type of activity and many
>> others runs about $3500 for your number of nodes (not knowing your public
>> connection size I guessed at larger than a single T1) and that includes
>> the web blocking service to limit access to content by type.
>
> We trialled Bluecoat, but in the end the Boss wouldn't fork out for
> it.
>
> We trialled LANDesk (which has additional uses such as licensing
> compliance, but gives you total control over the desktop in a very
> automated way - My final trial I ran on it was "Discover all MP3,
> etc.. files on the network"....and then the trial management PC was
> retired & became the office jukebox....hehe), but they wanted
> something like $1,000,000 to put it in (a lot of that was licensing)
> and the Boss wouldn't fork out for it.
>
> Something like Websense would have been good - it's a bit of a blunt
> instrument but it can really discourage 'net surfing, which is good.
> Again, the Boss wouldn't even consider this, due to cost.
>
>> As an exmaple, we've increased productivity almost 30% over
>> pre-firewall/blocking levels at most places we've setup, and the
>> maintenance costs have all decreased since so many other malware threats
>> were also reduced - the units pay for installation and updates in less
>> than 6 months in most cases.
>
> Yeah, we had already had to manually scrape out the malware since it
> exploded in late 2003, using the firewall to identify it all
> primarily, seeing as the Boss wouldn't fork out for anything else.
> He wouldn't even agree to send a donation to the makers of Adaware &
> Spybot when we suggested it.
>
> At least they agreed to aggressively hunt down and replace all the
> Windows98 PCs in 2005 - I think by the end of that year there were
> less than 500 of them left.
> ...then we just had to deal with all the Users complaining that we had
> taken control of their desktops and denied them admin rights.....

And it appears that most all of your testing/trials were with products
that don't really apply to your need.

A cheap/simple WatchGuard firewall with the Web Blocker service (also
cheap) and even the AV/Spam services if you want go that far, would do all
that you need.

The specific firewall model would depend on your internet connection
capacity, web blocker is a one cost item - each model of firewall has a
cost associate with WebBlocker service - normally cheap - and the service
blocks many groups of crap.

The nice thing about the firewall and WB service is that you can allow
some users to use RULE1 (no blocking) others to use RULE2 (block all) and
still other can use RULE3,4,5,6... so that you can adjust the content
blocking as needed - you can also create white/black lists for all rules.

If you boss won't pay for anything with a base as large as your, well, the
hosts file updates/maintenance will cost more than the firewill and
provides a BETTER ability to protect the network/users. Your host file is
of limited value and does nothing to protect your network from new or
other methods of access.

--
Want to know what PCBUTTS1 is really about?
*** WARNING - these links contain foul/pornographic content of an
abusive nature created by PCBUTTS1 and still hosted on his public
website ***
http://www.pcbutts1.com/rlk/rlk.htm ,
http://www.pcbutts1.com/license.htm ,
http://www.pcbutts1.com/downloads/max.htm ,
http://www.pcbutts1.com/downloads/mpv.htm ,
http://www.pcbutts1.com/downloads/wtcpcb.htm ,
http://www.pcbutts1.com/cracks.htm ,
http://www.pcbutts1.com/Loutheasshole.htm
All while spamming his company website at: http://www.seedsv.com