Re: [OT] DOD

This WebDNA talk-list message is from

2002


It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 45024
interpreted = N
texte = Dan Strong wrote: > FunnelWeb Analyzer is showing from my logs that the US Department of > Defense has been browsing my (and some of my clients') site(s). Is this > accurate? A glitch in FunnelWeb?They're quite loyal visitors at Musica Viva too, but of course that's no mystery. A classical music site has to be a prime cause for suspicion for them ;-) They don't seem to be big spenders at my site, though. A waste of precious bandwith, that's what they are! :-(> > I mean, if it's true, I suppose DOD employees like to surf the web too,They do - quite a lot more than you'd get away with in a normal private company in fact. (And yes, I do have reliable sources for that information, but I'm not going to reveal them, of course...)Even so, the US DOD might actually be trying to keep tabs on the entire internet. If anybody has the resources for it (and the willingness to waste time and money on such a stupid task), it has to be them.> but it just seems weird...maybe a new anti-cyberterrorist initiative? Definitely not a new initative. It's been going on for years.> And if so, why me and my clients?Rest assured that it's everybody else as well! Frank Nordberg http://www.musicaviva.com ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://search.smithmicro.com/ Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:

    
  1. Re: [OT] DOD again *MYSTERY SOLVED* (Alex McCombie 2003)
  2. Re: [OT] DOD again *MYSTERY SOLVED* (Glenn Busbin 2003)
  3. Re: [OT] DOD again *MYSTERY SOLVED* (Dan Strong 2003)
  4. Re: [OT] DOD again (Dan Strong 2003)
  5. Re: [OT] DOD again (Kimberly D. Walls 2003)
  6. Re: [OT] DOD again (SREGALADO@aol.com 2003)
  7. Re: [OT] DOD again (Dan Strong 2003)
  8. Re: [OT] DOD again (Frank Nordberg 2003)
  9. Re: [OT] DOD again (Donovan 2003)
  10. Re: [OT] DOD again (Dan Strong 2003)
  11. Re: [OT] DOD again (Dan Strong 2003)
  12. Re: [OT] DOD again (Gyuri 2003)
  13. Re: [OT] DOD again (Donovan 2003)
  14. Re: [OT] DOD again (Kimberly D. Walls 2003)
  15. Re: [OT] DOD again (Alex McCombie 2003)
  16. Re: [OT] DOD again (Dan Strong 2003)
  17. Re: [OT] DOD again (Dan Strong 2003)
  18. Re: [OT] DOD again (Dan Strong 2003)
  19. Re: [OT] DOD again (Dan Strong 2003)
  20. Re: [OT] DOD again (Glenn Busbin 2003)
  21. Re: [OT] DOD again (Alex McCombie 2003)
  22. Re: [OT] DOD again (Brian Boegershausen 2003)
  23. Re: [OT] DOD again (Glenn Busbin 2003)
  24. Re: [OT] DOD again (Alex McCombie 2003)
  25. Re: [OT] DOD again (Kimberly D. Walls 2003)
  26. Re: [OT] DOD again (Brian Boegershausen 2003)
  27. [OT] DOD again (Dan Strong 2003)
  28. Re: [OT] DOD (Frank Nordberg 2002)
  29. Re: [OT] DOD (Dan Strong 2002)
  30. Re: [OT] DOD (dale's stuff 2002)
  31. Re: [OT] DOD (Dan Strong 2002)
  32. Re: [OT] DOD (Robert Wade 2002)
  33. Re: [OT] DOD (Gary Krockover 2002)
  34. [OT] DOD (Dan Strong 2002)
Dan Strong wrote: > FunnelWeb Analyzer is showing from my logs that the US Department of > Defense has been browsing my (and some of my clients') site(s). Is this > accurate? A glitch in FunnelWeb?They're quite loyal visitors at Musica Viva too, but of course that's no mystery. A classical music site has to be a prime cause for suspicion for them ;-) They don't seem to be big spenders at my site, though. A waste of precious bandwith, that's what they are! :-(> > I mean, if it's true, I suppose DOD employees like to surf the web too,They do - quite a lot more than you'd get away with in a normal private company in fact. (And yes, I do have reliable sources for that information, but I'm not going to reveal them, of course...)Even so, the US DOD might actually be trying to keep tabs on the entire internet. If anybody has the resources for it (and the willingness to waste time and money on such a stupid task), it has to be them.> but it just seems weird...maybe a new anti-cyberterrorist initiative? Definitely not a new initative. It's been going on for years.> And if so, why me and my clients?Rest assured that it's everybody else as well! Frank Nordberg http://www.musicaviva.com ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://search.smithmicro.com/ Frank Nordberg

DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!

Top Articles:

Talk List

The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...

Related Readings:

Searching multiple Databases (1997) RE: Error: template (1997) WebCatalog Technical Reference (1997) [UPPERCASE] (1997) RE: Automatic Forwarding using WebCat (1997) Here we go again...WebDNA - SQL- Clustering (2006) Nested Loops and SHOWIFs (1997) Best Linux/webcat config?? (2000) WebCat hosting providers? (1997) [WebDNA] TCPConnect/cURL alternative for windows? (2010) Part Html part WebDNA (1997) webcat2b12 CGI -- Date comparisons (1997) plugin-acgi, different results (1997) Repost: Upload file limits (2000) Card clearance, problems - solutions? (1997) # fields limited? (1997) Anyone online? (2004) Summing a field full of numbers ... (1997) different show next (1997) [OT] Graphic Art Services (2004)