RG> the main part of our business these days is offering webhosting
RG> services, so needless to say, our domain name(s) and other
RG> contact information is readily available from many different
RG> sources.

RG> One of our IP addresses is actually on a dynamic link, and even
RG> that one starts to get 'probed' within MINUTES of us being
RG> connected.

RG> It really is a jungle out there.

 What are they looking for? Is the probe and attack, or what?

> David tells me he runs a hardware firewall.

RG> Hmm, a hardware firewall will be fucking hard to configure.
RG> I'll wager that software is involved, just like our own
RG> firewall, which as I've mentioned is nothing more than an old
RG> 486 running a linux kernal with packet filtering and an SSH
RG> server to allow configuration/administration.

 He says it is dedicated. I asume the "software" is in ROM, like a
micro.

> I'd like to know why Telstra and the rest can't do what the BBS
> sysops used to do, and filter the unwanted shit.

RG> There are many answers to this one. Firstly, as an Internet
RG> hosting business I don't want our uplink (Telstra) from
RG> filtering ANY of the emails destined to ANY of the clients we
RG> host. We are quite capable of doing this ourselves thank you. 

 I assume that Telstra provides two services anyway: professional and
consumer. Just filter the consumers.

RG> Secondly, Telstra, etc ultimately base their prices on how much
RG> data is sent across their network, more spam = more traffic =
RG> more profit.

 There is an obvious flaw in your reasoning. If that's true, why not
generate it's own spam?

RG> Thirdly, very little spam actually originates from the Telstra
RG> servers (or their customers). The bulk of the spam originates
RG> overseas.

 Exactly! Filter it out as it arrives off the satellite... or better
still; bounce it back and double the traffic.

RG> Fourthly, while one ISP may consider Email promoting Viagra as
RG> being spam, some people consider it to be 'ham', so trying to
RG> block 'spam' at such a high level is going to alient and/or
RG> inconvenience a lot of people. Spam blocking is (or should be)
RG> a PERSONAL decision.

 It wasn't on Fido... and that worked.

RG> The only 'product' being the SSH server for admin purposes.
RG> This machine doesn't even have a monitor or keyboard connected
RG> to it. The SSH server can only be accessed via our own machines
RG> (actually, only MY machine).

 God! Sambo is awkward to use (all right then, Samba). The problem is
not blocking access... it's that *every* permission has to be granted
separately. For convenience setting it up, I used SHARE access and
even so, I can't get past the actual Linux permissions. Bloody thing.

 BTW, I bought a new printer, and have since discovered that as well
as Winmodems there are Winprinters! Bloody thing. Now I'll have to
wait until someone writes a GDI driver for Linux.

> > If I must run an executable, then I'll do it on the Linux
> > machine.

RG> How do you propose to run Windoze executables on a Linux
RG> machine?

> The way I do now...

 Dual boot. I boot Win31, Win98 and Linux. Linux saves to a Windows
drive quite happily.

RG> The only reason I keep a windoze machine running is because
RG> because we do our quartarly BAS returns online, and the ATO
RG> hasn't made a linux version of this software available. I'd
RG> REALLY like to know how I can run this s/ware on a linux box so
RG> I can say goodby to windoze forever.

 It's cruel, isn't it? You can run Linux out of Windows but not the
reverse unless you use that expensive commercial program whose name
escapes me.

RG> How many Linux executables do you know of that are actually
RG> viruses?

> Can I call a friend?

RG> Are you planning to hold a seance or something?

 Can I go fifty-fifty on that one?

 Or aren't you an Eddie Maguire fan?

Regards,
Bob

--- BQWK Alpha 0.5