Linux - NetworkingThis forum is for any issue related to networks or networking.
Routing, network cards, OSI, etc. Anything is fair game.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
I have never seen a setup that changes the DNS for JUST the browser. If you have such a addon please post a link to it.
If a firefox addon can do the equivalent of a ping to site.com, it can get the associated ip, which it can place in the address bar and load up the content. EDIT: I forgot, that's not what we want. But what can an addon do anyway, can't it open a tcp/ip connection and mimic the format of a dns request to myDnsServer.com?
Originally Posted by lazlow
What does people not changing their DNS server (due mostly to laziness) have to do with mainstream media?
Haha I knew you were not ready for it. Here's some clues. The Mexican government is suing Baxter, because almost all who died of "swine flu" had taken the swine flu vaccine, and such is the news that matters. Such news is being suppressed by the controlled media, and will eventually also disappear from internet search engines, even from the web by flagging such sites as terrorist. But such news will never disappear from p2p networks. Eventually p2p networks will be the only place for free news exchange and a free press. For people that are not completely hypnotized by the mainstream media, pressing a button in an addon to switch between normal web and p2p web is easy. I believe they don't need to edit their linux configuration files or install software to mess with them.
If you are referring to bandwidth costs, you get charged for all traffic not just the traffic that you accept. Which is one of the reasons metered billing for residential lines is such a bad idea. If you mean machine resources (cpu cycles etc), sure rejecting all traffic except on port (whatever) means that (after refusing that connection) no further machine resources are used on that connection(you still eat the bandwidth).
I was thinking just in comparison to a regular p2p server. A regular p2p tracker has much more work to do than the dns server which only needs 1. dns lookups for visitors and 2. dns updates from participants powering up their web servers. What is cheaper then in terms of bandwidth required?
There are lots of underground news(as in newspaper like) servers around. Probably the easiest is also one of the oldest, usenet. People can connect anonymously to read and post, SSL connections are allowed on many servers. Just google usenet. Underground news still has nothing to do with people being lazy.
I really doubt you are going to be able to easily change DNS servers with a toolbar button. If nothing else changing the DNS requires root privileges on most systems and mixing root privileges with browsing is a bad idea.
Dig just looks up the information it does not change the DNS.
We get from myDnsServer.com the information that site.com is currently associated with 126.96.36.199, and open http://188.8.131.52/ That's what the system would normally do with its own dns server instead of myDnsServer.com. No need to change the system settings.
In the end it will be the same price. More than likely if you register with myDNS as you have described (assuming you are attacked as you believe), myDNS will either kick you for changing the linked IP too many times in a month/day or they will kick you for making them a target for an attack.
If the goal is really to disseminate news type stories I would STRONGLY encourage you to use usenet. You choose which(of literally thousands) newserver you will post to (so they cannot prevent you from posting). The servers are all interconnected (privately), so attacking one newserver will not prevent your message from getting out. For the type of media you are hinting at (mostly text) your only costs will be your bandwidth used to upload the text (could easily be done from even a dialup account). The text will stay up on most newserver for literally years.
Attackers will not be using just one machine they will be using thousands of machines. Second they do not need to actually have to have the server accept the connection to cause a issue, they just flood the incoming que with requests to connect which prevents anybody else from being able to connect.
I used to use USENET back in the... mid 90's, it seems to do pretty much what I want. It suffered from spam and was abandoned by most people now that we have forums. It was too easy to spam. Maybe I'd have the same trouble with spam whatever I do, someone has to sort that out too.
By the way, DynDNS was for when we were talking about using normal dns servers, we're past that. Now I'm hoping to use myDnsServer.com, and compare it with an existing p2p tracker.
And again, myDnsServer.com has just become the target. When it gets brought down the rest of your network goes with it.
While many groups did (and do) suffer from large amounts of spam, the moderated groups are kept pretty clean. Usenet is FAR from abandoned, there are MANY more posts made today than there were in the 90s, even after you discount the spam.