test-drb March 1999

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

191 participants
1003 discussions

OT: Re: Security question (sort of)/goodbye

by roblwill＠usaor.net

You know, this is exactly the reason that I left the last mailing list. I mention that I'm only 16 years old, and ask a simple opinion such as "what would you do if your computer was hacked into?", and I get stuff like this. John, don't you think you could have been tactful enough to either send this directly to Sellam or to me?? As for my "security reasons", the pictures were removed so that certain people would not see them. They were posted for exactly 45 minutes. If you feel that you need to see them, email me, and I'll gladly send them to you. As for those of you addressing a BIOS problem, you are wrong. First of all, I could no longer enter the CMOS setup- the computer would freeze. Secondly, I bought a new AMIBOIS chip at the computer show today, and installed it in the motherboard. Booted, reconfigured, re-ran Windows setup. No serial ports detected (yes, I am smart enough to enable them in the CMOS setup). Windows says that the secondary controller of the dual IDE controller is "not present or not working properly" - yes, it is enabled in the CMOS. Answer me this question, John -- How am I supposed to access the Internet with the modem unplugged? My computer can't be hacked into when I'm not on the Internet, so I really don't think that's going to be a feasible solution, is it? Same goes for the hold button. I will say once again that I do not have a Windows configuration problem, and if someone on the list feels like sending me a check for $1600 for a new computer, I'll gladly have it thrown off the top of the Empire State Building, provided that you pay the top Ebay list price and shipping for it. And with this, I take my classic computing questions elsewhere. Flame away.-- -Jason Willgruber (roblwill(a)usaor.net) ICQ#: 1730318 <http://members.tripod.com/general_1> ------///////// -----// // ----// ## ---// ////### --// //#### -/////////## ## -----------/ ## / ## / ## / ######## /-----------> -----Original Message----- From: John Amirault <amirault(a)epix.net> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Saturday, March 20, 1999 7:27 AM Subject: Re: OT: Re: Security question (sort of) >Sellam, >If you read the RED words at the top of Jason's web page it says all the >pictures have been removed "FOR SECURITY REASONS". I for one do not know >what type of "SECURITY REASONS" he has, maybe he will enlighten us all. >I do know that my PENTIUM HAS THREE TYPES OF COMPUTERS IT CAN BE SET UP >AS 1. DESK TOP, 2.NETWORK SERVER(in my opinion not a good choice) 3. I >can't remember right now as I am on my 486 @ my girlfriends. If Jason is >using Windoze 98 or any OS he can check his MANUAL to find out about >security. When Jason is off line he can unplug his modem and NO ONE can >hack into his computer. Another thing you can do if you don't want to >keep plugging and unplugging is get a hold button from someplace like >"Radio Shack" and put it inline on your modem line and then when you >hang up push the button to place the computer on "hold", that is the >phone line is physically disconnected from the computer by a switch. > >Jason, please take this cordially as it is intended to HELP not to >chastise. I am sure there are many people out there that know much more >than I do about computers and I hope that they will share some knowledge >with you. > >John Amirault > >Sellam Ismail wrote: >> >> On Fri, 19 Mar 1999, Max Eskin wrote: >> >> > On Fri, 19 Mar 1999, Jason Willgruber wrote: >> > >Check out my website: >> > > >> > >http://members.tripod.com/general_1 >> > > >> > In summary, it caused damage to the serial ports. Any computer whose >> > hardware can be damaged by software in this way should be thrown off the >> > Empire State Building. >> >> I think what Jason may not have initially realized (and maybe still not >> yet even) is that his Windows system configuration files got screwed and >> therefore his serial ports are no longer accessible under windows. As far >> as I know, its impossible to physically damage a serial port through >> software unless you make it possible by building a device whose soul >> purpose is to electrically short pins on the serial port on command. And >> of course, no sane persson would go through the trouble. >> >> So all he really needs to do is probably go into the Cntrol Panel, select >> System, then go to ports, remove the old serial ports (if they are still >> there) then add them again. Or maybe let windows find them for you with >> the Add New Hardware icon. >> >> BTW, I checked out the web site but all the links are bad. They all end >> up at a Tripod "page not found" page. >> >> Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- >> Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out. >> >> Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0 >> See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details! >> [Last web site update: 02/15/99] >

25 years, 9 months

Sellam's market

by jfoust＠threedee.com

Hey, sellam.com isn't taken. :-) - John

25 years, 9 months

SWTPc 6800, common format (sharable?) repair journal?

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<and transister( 18n9 ) from rectifier bridge. The soldering job on MP-A2 <has alot of resin around connnections that I'm already pretty leary of. Il <start off by digging for all the hardware documentationI can find... Wash with alcohol, then put in dish washer to clean up the boards. The bulk of the SWTP hardware was hand assembled so removing the resion was often not done. <First question: The baud lines on both busses (110,150,300,600,1200) caug <my eye and that ad above states: "Crystal controlled oscillator( 1,7971 ) <provides the clock signal for the processor (before?) and is divided down b <the MC14411 (both on MP-A2 GK) to provide the various baud rate outputs fo <the interface circuts. Full buffering on all data and address busses..." <Does that mean that all these cards are serial? No! They had a common baud rate generation to avoid repeating a circut that generally appears on every serial card. It was one way to reduce the cost by elimintaing redundant circutry. the transfers were via 8bit dat and 16bit address plus a hand ful of control lines. It was compact hence the name SS50 for the bus. Allison

25 years, 9 months

SWTPc 6800, common format (sharable?) repair journal?

by dogas＠leading.net

-----Original Message----- From: Sellam Ismail <dastar(a)ncal.verio.com> >> Any switheads out there? Any thoughts on the forthcomming "This Old >> Computer" episode? It would be cool to accumulate these restoration > >What? You aren't referring to a TV show, are you? yeah... The Switheads ;)

25 years, 9 months

PDP 11/44 RSTS/E Tape ops.

by jpl15＠netcom.com

Let's see if a small classic computer question stands a chance against the Din of Dissension and the Cacophony of Contumely that swirls in Voracious Votices of Vitriolic Vituperation... but I digress. The Question: Given, a PDP 11/44 system with attached SMD drive and 9trk streamer drive, running under RSTS/e V9.7. No OS docs are availble. 'Help' is. I would like to be able to move files to and from the 9trk unit. The controller is a TM11 and the device is MS0:. I have spent some hours reading to 'help' files related to this operation. I am pretty sure the *hardware* is correct and functional. I have played with Init-ing, Allocate-ing, and Mount-ing and the using PIP to move files. It is likely PIP doesn't speak sequential file devices but I'm not sure. I am leery of experimenting with Backup and Restore until I know more about the subtleties of their operations. Thanks in Advance Cheers John

25 years, 9 months

SWTPc 6800, common format (sharable?) repair journal?

by dogas＠leading.net

Hey, I'd watch it.... -----Original Message----- From: Sellam Ismail <dastar(a)ncal.verio.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Saturday, March 20, 1999 11:43 PM Subject: Re: SWTPc 6800, common format (sharable?) repair journal? >On Sat, 20 Mar 1999, Mike wrote: > >> Any switheads out there? Any thoughts on the forthcomming "This Old >> Computer" episode? It would be cool to accumulate these restoration > >What? You aren't referring to a TV show, are you? > >Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- >Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out. > > Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0 > See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details! > [Last web site update: 02/15/99] > >

25 years, 9 months

Security question (sort of)

by roblwill＠usaor.net

If the ART chips that drive the serial ports are gone, they won't work no matter what it used to access them. -- -Jason Willgruber (roblwill(a)usaor.net) ICQ#: 1730318 <http://members.tripod.com/general_1> ------///////// -----// // ----// ## ---// ////### --// //#### -/////////## ## -----------/ ## / ## / ## / ######## /-----------> -----Original Message----- From: Eric Smith <eric(a)brouhaha.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Friday, March 19, 1999 10:25 PM Subject: Re: Security question (sort of) >Jason wrote: > >> A virus planted by a hacker can damage hardware by "eating" at the chips, > >I'm not a virus expert, but I am an experienced embedded systems programmer, >and have done some hardware design. That said, this claim sounds completely >ridiculous to me, on par with an urban legend. Care to explain this from a >electronics (or physics, or chemistry) point of view? > >> or just scrambling the code in the chip. > >In a flash BIOS, maybe, although that would be tend to be specific to a >certain motherboard. There's no general way to write a virus that can trash >the BIOS on any arbitrary motherboard, because unlike much of the >"PC standard", there is not a stanard for how the flash BIOS programming >works. Different motherboards use different types of flash chips that >have different programming requirements. > >I've never yet heard of a virus doing this, although I'll concede that it is >possible. Decent motherboards require you to physically move a jumper in >order to enable programming the BIOS, to prevent exactly this kind of problem. > >However, changing the BIOS such that the machine still booted but simply >didn't have INT 13 serial support wouldn't prevent all software from >using the serial port. Most software these days doesn't even bother to >go through the BIOS to access the ports, because (1) the BIOS interface >is incredibly lame, and (2) on some machines the BIOS functions don't even >work correctly. > >> (I know someone (Ironically, it's the sister of the person that did this >> to my computer), who's keyboard controller chip got scrambled. > >Sounds like a complete coincidence to me. Except for exotic (and fairly >expensive) keyboards, the firmware is in masked ROM inside a microcontroller, >and there is no way to modify it without physically replacing the chip. > >Eric >

25 years, 9 months

Computers in Parallel

by roblwill＠usaor.net

I'm certain that some other method other than Beowulf will be used for the Commodore project. -- -Jason Willgruber (roblwill(a)usaor.net) ICQ#: 1730318 <http://members.tripod.com/general_1> ------///////// -----// // ----// ## ---// ////### --// //#### -/////////## ## -----------/ ## / ## / ## / ######## /-----------> -----Original Message----- From: Mike Ford <mikeford(a)netwiz.net> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Saturday, March 20, 1999 2:48 AM Subject: Re: Computers in Parallel >>> I think you should do it. I have a batch of Mac IIfx and I may try a >>> parallel arrangement with them one of my friends told me about. >>> >>> As an experiment lots is to be learned from this. I don't however have any >>> plans to "use" it. >>> >>> For a start I suggest looking at some of the encryption cracking efforts. >> >>Well, I haven't heard of Beowulf being implemented under MacLinux.

25 years, 9 months

Pre-history of Digital Research

by edick＠idcomm.com

Yes, but what's not off topic is that they're planning to revive support, at least to the extent of providing documentation, etc, (on what basis, I don't know) for their whole product line, at least as it's available. This will be helpful to some, who still (rarely) use the old stuff, and to other who would like to but can't because they haven't got the required spec's. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Steve Robertson <steverob(a)hotoffice.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Saturday, March 20, 1999 2:35 PM Subject: OT: Pre-history of Digital Research >Based on the proposed hardware descripition (Pentium MB, etc..), the >"rebirth" of the IMSAI is completely off topic. > >Steve Robertson <steverob(a)hotoffice.com>

25 years, 9 months

Fw: Pre-history of Digital Research

by steverob＠hotoffice.com

> This web site is worth a visit. It seems to imply that as time allows, > they're going to publish documents on the web, and perhaps even produce more > of their old product line. Yep.. That's what I got from the site. I don't own an IMSAI (yet) and certainly don't feel like paying $2000 for one. This could provide a viable alternative. Personally, I prefer to build a new one, using old technology, than to deal with a kit someone else built 25 years ago. Of course the components and methods would have to remain true to the original. The tenative price of $500 seems awfully high to me. After all, it's not like there is a lot of R&D involved, the components aren't exactly cutting-edge, and to some extent the markets are already established. This would certainly drive down the prices of the originals. For most of us that would be a good thing. If anyone has one that they want to unload before the bottom drops completely out, let me know ;-) Steve Robertson <steverob(a)hotoffice.com>

25 years, 9 months

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

test-drb March 1999