INFO-VAX Sat, 23 Aug 2008 Volume 2008 : Issue 460 Contents: Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Re: SAS 9.2 on HP OpenVMS Integrity Re: SMGRTL patch available on ITRC ftp site Re: strange tcpip issue Re: strange tcpip issue ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 14:50:06 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Message-ID: <48af0b67$0$1807$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: > Such a thing could be implemented using a method described in one of > the prior posts in this thread that I epressed concern about to weap- > onize this. I should hope that nobody does that! Actually, being a good devil's advocate, perhaps a large scale very public attack on VMS would be beneficial. There would be a lot of publicity about VMS, and the media might mention that while VMS isn't widely widespread, it is used in very serious applications where quality and stability are extremely important. In other words, hackers could give VMS the publicity HP refuses to give its own unwanted bastard child that is the result of an unwanted marriage. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:02:48 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Message-ID: <48af0e62$0$1807$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com> Bob Koehler wrote: >> "On every system I'm familiar with library addresses changes between >> releases / library versions." > > I have never had to relink an application on any system because of > this. I have one example on VMS. ALL-IN-1 uses callable TPU. At one point, upgrading VMS broke ALL-IN-1's ability to call TPU. One needed to upgrade All-In-1 to regain callable TPU capability. This was on VAX. (going from 5.5-2 to 7.2 if I remember correctly) Undoubtedly All-in-1 was probably doing things that weren't too kosher with regards to integration of TPU into its own run time environment. But still... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 21:15:03 +0200 From: Michael Kraemer Subject: Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Message-ID: JF Mezei schrieb: > In other words, hackers could give VMS the publicity HP refuses to give > its own unwanted bastard child that is the result of an unwanted marriage. But Curly and Carly *wanted* to get married, no ? And VMS existed long before that marriage. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:26:35 -0400 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" Subject: Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Message-ID: Michael Kraemer wrote: > JF Mezei schrieb: > >> In other words, hackers could give VMS the publicity HP refuses to give >> its own unwanted bastard child that is the result of an unwanted >> marriage. > > But Curly and Carly *wanted* to get married, no ? > And VMS existed long before that marriage. > Carly just wanted DEC Field Service! That was the center piece of the deal. VMS, Alpha technology and all the rest were just clutter that came with what she really wanted. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 21:27:27 GMT From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing) Subject: Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Message-ID: <00A7E7EB.AA4FA910@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> In article , koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: >In article <6h5c4rFjdi7iU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >> >> You are not by any chance refering to "Safe-C" which was available for >> the PDP-11 under Unix and other OSes as far back as the 70's, were you? :-) > > Safe-C, or SAFEC, or some similar name and I don't know of all the > things they did that made it "safe". As I vaguely recall, it was actually an interpreter rather than a compiler, which meant they couldcatch runtime errors, buffer overflows, etc, etc. -- Alan ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 20:44:53 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: SAS 9.2 on HP OpenVMS Integrity Message-ID: <48AF6B95.5998CB2A@spam.comcast.net> "Main, Kerry" wrote: > > All, > > The readers of this list might be interested in the following announcement: > > [Please note that Sue would really like to see as many of you as possible attending this event] > > :) > > +++++++++++ > SAS delivers SAS 9.2 on HP OpenVMS Integrity Servers - hear what's new! > > You're invited to attend a joint HP / SAS Webinar to learn about this powerful combination of > hardware and software. > > SAS, as the leader in business analytics software and services, is the first company to call > when you need to solve complex business problems, achieve key objectives and more > effectively manage your information assets. > > As you may now know, SAS recently delivered the SAS 9.2 (Foundation) products on > OpenVMS for HP Integrity Servers. Many of our customers have been eagerly awaiting this > release and are very excited - hear why. > > Join us and learn about HP's roadmap for OpenVMS and the exciting new features already > available in the latest release and plans for future releases. > > OpenVMS on HP Integrity Servers provides an exciting combination of flexibility, lower TCO > (total cost of ownership), and help IT Managers do more with less. > > The webinar will cover topics: > * SAS 9.2 - what is new and how you can benefit > * Benefits of HP Integrity servers > * OpenVMS Strategy and Directions > * How to move from Alpha to Integrity > * Resources available to help > > The one hour webinar is planned for 10-Sep-08 at 12:00 pm EDT (Boston Time UTC/GMT -5 > hours) - mark your calendar now! > > To register, please go to: > > http://h71000.www7.hp.com/SAS_OpenVMS_webinar_form.html > > You will receive an email with instructions on how to connect to the webinar. > > If you have any questions, please contact John.Egolf@hp.com or Ephraim.Peak@sas.com > > We're looking forward to meeting with you. Well, that looks good from an engineering viewpoint. (Need I say it?) Now, how 'bout promotion? What's being done at either HP or SAS to "put the word in the streets"? D.J.D. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 14:41:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Rich Jordan Subject: Re: SMGRTL patch available on ITRC ftp site Message-ID: <154c1530-5a18-42bf-b844-b5082f4b34c1@34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> On Aug 20, 10:03=A0pm, John Santos wrote: > In article , > B...@rabbit.turquoisewitch.com says... > > > Subject says it all. =A0I'm off... > > IVES# set term/unknown > IVES# mcr install > INSTALL> > aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa > aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa > aaaaaaaa > aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa > aaaaaaaa > aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa > aaaaaaaa > aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa > aaaaaaaa > aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa > aaaaaaaa > aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaA > %CLI-W-TKNOVF, command element is too long - shorten > > (Pasting into my newsreader caused the new lines in the middle of all > the "aaa"'s.) > > The uppercase A and the error message resulted when I hit the 1st > uparrow. > > The 2nd uparrow recalled the long line of "aaa...aaa" and the 3rd > uparrow echoed as another "A" and repeated the error message. =A0No > stack dump. =A0No bogus jump, as far as I can tell. =A0Looks to be fixed. > > (Patches available for I64 V8.2, V8.2-1, V8.3 and V8.3-1H1, and for > VMS V7.3-2, V8.2 and V8.3. =A0No patch for VAX of any version, at least > not yet.) > > -- > John Any word, idea, hint, or rumor about when the VAX patch(es) will be made available? We still have two in service production Plus the workstation on my desk. Rich ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 18:48:11 -0500 From: BRAD@rabbit.turquoisewitch.com (Brad Hamilton) Subject: Re: strange tcpip issue Message-ID: In article <6h7ohaFjp7tnU1@mid.individual.net>, Bill Gunshannon wrote: [...] >> Plenty of outside access. If somebody can point me in the right direction to >> updates. >> >> Thanks for the help. > >OK, let me say it before anyone else does!! > >Go to Process Software and get Multinet under their hobbyist program. >You won't regret it and you'll never go back to UCX. > Don't forget TCPware from the same company; another fine product to make one forget UCX/TCPIP "Services"... [...] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 20:42:50 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: strange tcpip issue Message-ID: <48AF6B1A.2E6F4CEA@spam.comcast.net> Tim Wilkinson wrote: > > OK please be gentle, it must be 15 years since I last touched a vax./vms > > So VMS 7.3 installed and working on a subnetted network. (tcp on a vax. new > to me, it was all decnet and lat in my day). > > So. my company use the RFC1918 scheme globally the UK has 10.32.0.0/12 > assigned to it. When we get to my home I have a wonderfully generous /28 > subnet mask applied. > > so whilst my dhcp router dishes out address with a netmask of > 255.255.255.240 which is picked up by my PC/linux boxes etc. I issue the > command on my vms system > > TCPIP> ifconfig -a > LO0: flags=100c89 > inet 127.0.0.1 netmask ff000000 ipmtu 4096 > > QE0: flags=c63 > inet 10.34.220.88 netmask ff000000 broadcast 10.255.255.255 ipmtu 1500 > > QE1: flags=c43 > inet 192.168.17.125 netmask ffffff00 broadcast 192.168.17.255 ipmtu > 1500 > > TN0: flags=80 > > so interface QE0 which is assigned using dhcp is picking up the correct ip > address, but ignores the subnet mask and assigns the wrong mask of > ff000000, and incorrect broadcast address. > > my pc etc on the same network gives me > Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection: > > Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : netgear.com > IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 10.34.220.89 > Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.240 > Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 10.34.220.81 > So I know my router/dhcp configs are right. > > I had seen similar in old systems years ago, where ip stacks did not > properly support subnet masking. But I would have thought DEC would have got > this right. > > Advice please guys how do I fix this VMS machines typically do not get DHCP served, they typically have static addresses assigned to them and configured on them. That said, as others have pointed out, UCX took the usual few tries to get it "right". CIDR is a fairly new innovation from the viewpoint of VMS IP stacks. Even PSC didn't come out with that until fairly recently, relatively speaking. D.J.D. ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2008.460 ************************