Right, this thread is for telling folk that the 'proper' ILX is down again, so if you see this above the "ILX is back up" thread it means ILX is back down

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (475 of them)
Thanks ailsa. How did you know I wanted it for kittens? :)

kv_nol (kv_nol), Monday, 12 February 2007 14:07 (seventeen years ago) link

(the html checker frowns on pointy brackets unless you do them in html too, which is probably where acrobat's explanation went)

xpost - it's ILX, dude, what else would you want it for?

ailsa_xx (ailsa_xx), Monday, 12 February 2007 14:09 (seventeen years ago) link

To write actual pointy brackets on the screen, incidentally, you write &lt; for < and &gt; for >

Forest Pines (ForestPines), Monday, 12 February 2007 14:11 (seventeen years ago) link

Aye, see that's where I'd fall down, because I'd write that and it'd magically turn into pointy brackets, hence missing the point.

ailsa_xx (ailsa_xx), Monday, 12 February 2007 14:16 (seventeen years ago) link

so the few miserable cunts who dislike me can have a great argument for banning me?

FWIW jon (as if you care) I don't dislike you but the whole hacker ethics bewilders me. The problems you find are important but it seems the methods you use to highlight just create more headaches for people who are ultimately volunteers.

Ms Misery (MsMisery), Monday, 12 February 2007 14:23 (seventeen years ago) link

On the bright side, I not only look ridiculous now, but people might remember me for my naivety. I guess I'm just throwing out halfway uninformed opinions after a few years of underposting and overlurking.

mh (mike h.), Monday, 12 February 2007 14:30 (seventeen years ago) link

Aye, see that's where I'd fall down, because I'd write that and it'd
magically turn into pointy brackets, hence missing the point.

If you want to write &lt, write &amp;lt; - and if you want to write &amp;lt; write &amp;amp;lt;... oh the hilarity.

ledge (ledge), Monday, 12 February 2007 14:38 (seventeen years ago) link

xpost - it's ILX, dude, what else would you want it for?

OTM. Have done my work on the other thread. I'll stop now for fear of the madness that might be unleashed!

kv_nol (kv_nol), Monday, 12 February 2007 14:44 (seventeen years ago) link

Anyway, the point is that Starry Sarah is totally noize.

Laurel (Laurel), Monday, 12 February 2007 14:45 (seventeen years ago) link

<

temporary enrique (temporary enrique), Monday, 12 February 2007 14:46 (seventeen years ago) link

<

temporary enrique (temporary enrique), Monday, 12 February 2007 14:47 (seventeen years ago) link

</life>

Ste (fuzzy), Monday, 12 February 2007 14:51 (seventeen years ago) link

I think that I trust Jon enough to not fuck with things.
have i woken up in a parallel universe or something?

Well, he could have, but did he? As far as I can see, he didn't reallty (except maybe ban Kate, but that's not really THAT harmful). Like Ms Misery, I don't get the hacker mentality/code/whatever, but I'm happy he did hack into the database and showed us it was fragile. So ok, maybe the admins knew, but I think it's stil (sort of) a good thing.

nathalie (stevienixed), Monday, 12 February 2007 14:59 (seventeen years ago) link

(I just mean: cut him some slack.)

nathalie (stevienixed), Monday, 12 February 2007 14:59 (seventeen years ago) link

cap'n save-a-hax0r

Nu-Edward III (edward iii), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:20 (seventeen years ago) link

Nath, there is a fundamental difference between reviewing the code and reporting a problem and 'hacking into the database' and causing problems -- without telling anybody, and letting the mods discover what had happened after the fact. If that distinction isn't clear then I don't know what to say. I've had my own questions about these last couple of days but you have no idea about the level of anger these and previous instances have caused among the mods.

Pash, Stet and KeefW in particular are dedicated to providing -- as has been noted, on a strictly *volunteer* basis -- the best possible home for ILX at the present time. They coordinated the effort, they have shown a hell of a lot of energy and good judgment in general, and they do want make sure that ILX runs efficiently and securely. No offense but you might want to cut *THEM* slack first.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:20 (seventeen years ago) link

As Matt says though, most of the time you don't register much with me, and I guess I don't register much with you either, but why is it that whenever you DO it's for things like this?

Because you only post on Chicago threads?

-- jw (jo...), February 11th, 2007.

Uh, that is not Chicago Sarah.

This thread is about QA, right?

JordanC (JordanC), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:25 (seventeen years ago) link

Also, Jon hasn't done much (though random banning of people you don't like must raise some sort of ethical issues), but he's threatened enough, and fucked shit up in the past enough, that the mods thought it wasn't a risk worth taking.

As Ned says, a helpful person would send an email going "look, here is a loophole I have found, do you want to fix it" rather than fucking shit up for everyone else and claiming that somehow that was a better way of drawing said loophole to the attention of Keith, Stet and Pashmina, if he's really doing this for the collective good of ILX.

ailsa_xx (ailsa_xx), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:26 (seventeen years ago) link

I think it was more the banning that was for the collective good; getting to point out a hole in the code is basically a fringe benefit.

Laurel (Laurel), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:28 (seventeen years ago) link

xpost But hasn't Jon reported the errors numerous times to the mods? What exactly did he do wrong? He hacked into the database, but what did he do wrong there save (?) making himself a mod and banning Kate (which is a somewhat crap thing to do... I know). I mean, I'm not saying he should be applauded for what he did, but in some crazy ass way I can understand (from his snooty geek point of view wink wink). He should be spanked (heh!), I mean, told off for what he did, but it's not the end of the world/ILX.

I mean, everyone acts as though he's destroyed ILX. FFS, he just hacked into the database and banned/elected himself mod. That's quickly solved, no?

nathalie (stevienixed), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:29 (seventeen years ago) link

lol
xp

onimo (nu_onimo), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:30 (seventeen years ago) link

Nath I think the point is that, rightly or wrongly, some of the mods/coders do not trust Jon to have access to mod priveleges and not abuse them whenever he's in the mood to do so.

Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:32 (seventeen years ago) link

He hacked into the database, but what did he do wrong there

Excuse me, I'm going to go find a wall to bang my head against.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:33 (seventeen years ago) link

it appears he does not need to have access to mod priveleges seeing as how he can make them and take them when he pleases.

Ms Misery (MsMisery), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:33 (seventeen years ago) link

FFS, he just hacked into the database and banned/elected himself mod

Oh, that small matter of TOTAL POTENTIAL TO FUCK SHIT UP? That's all right then. Hurrah for Jon! Boo to over-reacting coders/admins!

ailsa_xx (ailsa_xx), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:35 (seventeen years ago) link

There is a post upthread that apparently people either haven't read or are willfully ignoring. Let me repost it:

Everybody:

Jon found a security hole in ILX that lets him get access to the database. Full access, so he can give himself mod privs, delete posts, threads, boards, the whole site.

He didn't tell Keith or me how he did it, he just took advantage of it. Keith and I are the only people with access to the server right now. We both have full-time jobs. The old ILX code running depends on people not trying to break it, or hack in.

If Jon is going to hack the boards by finding holes -- of which there are many -- we can't leave them up without doing a lot more admin work to try and stop him. On top of which, the new host's backup system hasn't been set up yet, so we have no backups right now.

We're going to move to the new secure code. It's not quite ready, it hasn't had all the features fleshed out, but it lets you post and is largely secure.

-- stet (bonald...), February 11th, 2007. (later)

Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:36 (seventeen years ago) link

yes hacking into the main db is a very, very bad thing. which is, from what I understand, why he did it. to show how dangerous it was.

Ms Misery (MsMisery), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:37 (seventeen years ago) link

"He didn't really _shoot_ anyone, I don't see what the fuss is about."

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:38 (seventeen years ago) link

x-post -- I need to look for that wall again.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:38 (seventeen years ago) link

also, yeah, lolz at Laurel. But I'll be all little miss principle here and suggest that if Jon had decided to ban, say, Ned or Dan or Allyzay or Nabisco or someone who isn't quite the polariser that Kaet is, the reaction might be slightly different.

ailsa_xx (ailsa_xx), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:38 (seventeen years ago) link

but he didn't!

onimo (nu_onimo), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:39 (seventeen years ago) link

BAN ALLYZAY

a_p (a_p), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:41 (seventeen years ago) link

Oh yeah! xpost to onimo

(someone please randomly ban nathalie for experimental purposes)

ailsa_xx (ailsa_xx), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:41 (seventeen years ago) link

The guy broke into the house, and he only took a couple of CDs. I think it's cool, cos it shows me that broken lock that I KNEW WAS BROKEN and had the LOCKSMITH BOOKED TO COME FIX was broken. He didn't steal the TV, after all.

stet (stet), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:44 (seventeen years ago) link

Yeah but the CDs he stole were all shite ones no-one wanted to listen to.

onimo (nu_onimo), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:45 (seventeen years ago) link

rofl

Ms Misery (MsMisery), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:45 (seventeen years ago) link

(I should just read the kittens threads tbh)

onimo (nu_onimo), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:45 (seventeen years ago) link

I don't think that's exactly what principle means (xp or randomly) :)

The principle is that you don't ban people because you don't like them. Which, yeah, isn't a Fundamental Human Right or anything, and obviously jon comes from the noise board where that principle doesn't hold at all. But that's part of why he doesn't have site-wide powers, and why people are anxious about him giving himself them.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:48 (seventeen years ago) link

Of course it's wrong, you have to be retarded not to realize this but he did it to show how loopy ilx was. FFS he could have wrecked ILX but he DID NOT.

nathalie (stevienixed), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:49 (seventeen years ago) link

Ned do you want me to move the wall a bit closer?

Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:50 (seventeen years ago) link

Could you please?

Nath, can I repeat something I JUST FREAKIN' POSTED FROM STET'S EARLIER COMMENT:

The old ILX code running depends on people not trying to break it, or hack in.

If Jon is going to hack the boards by finding holes -- of which there are many -- we can't leave them up without doing a lot more admin work to try and stop him.

In otherwards, could you please allow for the fact that, perhaps, the mods maybe possibly kinda knew that there were problems with the code as it stands?

Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:53 (seventeen years ago) link

xpost
yeah but Nath that's like saying "Sure he had a gun, but he only shot that person in the foot. He COULD have killed him!" ;) (I'm just having fun with you.)

also, we must all remember that this is just ILx. Not terribly huge and important in the great scheme of life. (as opposed to our feet.)

Ms Misery (MsMisery), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:53 (seventeen years ago) link

In other words, it's the hacking itself that's the problem, not what he did or didn't do once he'd hacked in.

I don't know how many other ways there are for people to say this.

Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:53 (seventeen years ago) link

Of course it's wrong, you have to be retarded not to realize this but he did it to show how loopy ilx was.

And the first time he did this, people took his intentions into account and said "thanks, but don't do it that way". But this isn't the first time he's done this kind of shit, or even the tenth.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:56 (seventeen years ago) link

7th?

onimo (nu_onimo), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:57 (seventeen years ago) link

I'm happy he did hack into the database and showed us it was fragile

mmm, yes, because NONE of us knew that, did we?

come on: this code is held together with chewing gum and string. that's why it's being recoded, FFS! which jon knows, as does everyone else: what the fuck is the point of "pointing out" security holes in something that's about to be canned anyway?

i can't believe anyone's buying this "it was for the public good" line. it was to noise people up (pun vaguely intended), as is so often the case with jon's little escapades. in which case:

I just mean: cut him some slack

no. don't get me wrong: i like jon some/most of the time, and enjoy his posts. but every so often he seems to have this compulsion to stick his dick into ILX, which only serves to fuck it up for everyone else. why doesn't he cut the board some slack?

grimly fiendish (simon), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:57 (seventeen years ago) link

The principle is that you don't ban people because you don't like them.

Yeah, and why I'm saying it's all very well going, "oh it's just Kate, she's a bit loopy and annoying haha", but I imagine it being someone other than Kate may lead the likes of Nathalie (in fact,it is just nathalie, isn't it?) to taking this a bit more seriously.

In case you were suggesting I didn't know what a principle was. If it wasn't me you were getting at, ignore me.

ailsa_xx (ailsa_xx), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:58 (seventeen years ago) link

also, we must all remember that this is just ILx. Not terribly huge and important in the great scheme of life.

Entirely true. Those who have made it part of their lives on a regular basis via site maintenance, coding, etc., however, have an understandable interest in database and hacking concerns that I think is being ignored or misunderstood by a number of those who haven't. And that's a damn shame. Nobody's looking for hosannas to boost our collective ego, but exactly what is so surprising to you about moderator worries about this situation?

Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 12 February 2007 15:58 (seventeen years ago) link

Those who have made it part of their lives on a regular basis via site maintenance, coding, etc., however, have an understandable interest in database and hacking concerns that I think is being ignored or misunderstood by a number of those who haven't.

Also, those who have made it part of their lives on a regular basis by READING and CONTRIBUTING (that aren't morons).

Though this is going to end with RJG turning up and telling everyone to let go, isn't it?

ailsa_xx (ailsa_xx), Monday, 12 February 2007 16:01 (seventeen years ago) link

I hope so.

onimo (nu_onimo), Monday, 12 February 2007 16:02 (seventeen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.