|
|
Posted by speeder on 10/09/05 21:53
On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 09:33:33 -0700, -Angela-
<TarapiaTapioco@jetmail.com> wrote:
>>Yes, George. But it's used when, as you say, you fire up the client and
>>connect. What Finntroll is saying is that he could theoretically enter any
>>offending IP's into his Hosts file and presumably redirect them to 127.0.0.1
>>(the localhost) so that the next time he connects THEY wouldn't be able to.
>>To be honest, he'd be better off using PeerGuardian, or entering them
>>directly into his firewall. Of course, there's always anti-leeching tools.
>>Hi, George!
>>
>
>You're not so terrible Hammerer !! This is a post for the record,
>one to write home about, no, one to *call* home about !! Yes! that's
>what I did. What?-- *You* giving a senseable, straight-forward,
>'might just be right' reply??? and even to George Hester !! I
>thought he was your favorite person to mis-lead down the stairway of
>doom. Your reputation is on the line here now I guess you know. I
>have been lurking here for a spell and this just shocked the shite out
>of me. Come clean- you're *really* a nice guy aren't you? Forget
>it, you'd never admit to that eh? ;o)
I hate to shock the shite out of you Angela (again), but Hammerer is
wrong...
The hosts file (or HOSTS, as George puts it) is only for domain name
lookups and will not work the way Hammerer described by putting IPs
directly into it (if the comp knows the IP it doesn't have to lookup
anything, now does it?).
As much as Hammerer might have tried to help, his neurons simply over
struggled him and and rendered him incapable of such act. Maybe it's a
DNA thing. You see, he simply can not be "senseable, straight-forward,
might-just-be-right" kinda guy. And specially not to George.
I guess your reputation is right where we would expect it, right
Hammerer?
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|