Most Read Technology Reporter For More Than Two Decades

Maureen O'Gara

Subscribe to Maureen O'Gara: eMailAlertsEmail Alerts
Get Maureen O'Gara: homepageHomepage mobileMobile rssRSS facebookFacebook twitterTwitter linkedinLinkedIn


Article

"If ISPs Are Blocking Sco.com Today, What Happened Jan 28/29?"

"I'm confused by what SCO is saying..."

Here is the Groklaw posting, which was anonymous, in full:

Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, February 01 2004 @ 06:21 AM EST

'There are Internet service providers around the world who are blocking access to SCO,' company spokesman Blake Stowell said, adding it was because they believe they can limit exposure to the virus that way. However, he said, Mydoom.A was not due to attack until Sunday, at precisely 1609 GMT.

"I'm confused by what SCO is saying. If MyDoom isn't supposed to attack until 1609 GMT, as Stowell said (and we all know from the numerous A/V outfits that it is indeed on 2/1 that it will start), then what happened on Jan 28 and 29? The uptime.netcraft.com site shows SCO as being completely down all of Jan 28, and not coming back on until Jan 29 afternoon. Not only that, but I tried to get onto SCO's website at just after 2:00am EST (-5:00) today, and it was down (like others have noticed). By my calculation, that's 07:00 GMT, which is significantly earlier than 16:09 GMT. The name resolves, but the web page will not load.

Also, I really wish the SEC would do something here. SCO keeps lying to them more and more with every filing. Especially this last one, claiming that MyDoom has already hit them, when everyone, even their own spokesman, says it isn't possible! There must be laws against filing known-false claims in your SEC filings...

And though the media is stupid enough to believe it, from what we are all seeing, it's not "Internet service providers around the world" that are blocking the traffic; it's merely one point -- 205.158.14.114.ptr.us.xo.net. This single point appears to be blocking all traffic to SCO's website. Now, I say "appears" because that's where the traceroute stops. It is more likely (in my opinion) that SCO simply pulled their site down, which is why the traceroute won't complete. But why would they do that? After all, didn't they claim to have taken the appropriate measure to make sure business was not interrupted?

How are we supposed to purchase their IP licenses when they pull their site down? Oh yeah, I forgot, it's that overzealous, anti-capitalist, hate-your-parents, do-your-homework-in-the-dark, GPL-loving Linux community that pulled the site down, not SCO. Right."

More Stories By Linux News Desk

SYS-CON's Linux News Desk gathers stories, analysis, and information from around the Linux world and synthesizes them into an easy to digest format for IT/IS managers and other business decision-makers.

Comments (0)

Share your thoughts on this story.

Add your comment
You must be signed in to add a comment. Sign-in | Register

In accordance with our Comment Policy, we encourage comments that are on topic, relevant and to-the-point. We will remove comments that include profanity, personal attacks, racial slurs, threats of violence, or other inappropriate material that violates our Terms and Conditions, and will block users who make repeated violations. We ask all readers to expect diversity of opinion and to treat one another with dignity and respect.