Live data from Hacker News

Slashdot is Port Scanning Its Users

soylentnews.org

41–45 of 45 posts

Re: Slashdot is Port Scanning Its Users

#41

I'm not sure what Slashdot actually is anymore. The titles of the entries appear interesting at first, but when you read the associated articles, any substantive content seems to vanish into thin air. I'm still interested, it's just not that interesting.

According to their (IIRC) tag line, it is/was "news for nerds, stuff that matters." Basically, HN for the late 90s, but with better features.

Re: Slashdot is Port Scanning Its Users

#43
post #37

Why? That question was asked now ~10 years back. The answer was: to check if the submitter is using an random open proxy server from the net to bypass their IP filter. From the code # If we don't have an IP address, it can't be an open proxy. And scanning commonly known proxy server ports. my $ports = $constants->{comments_portscan_ports} || '80 8080 8000 3128';

Yeah, I remember reading the same discussion in Slashdot ten or more years go. I also had the reason in the back of my head, thanks for reminding me :). This is nothing new, really. I hope we don't get a submission about how some contemporary CD's from Sony have a rootkit...

Re: Slashdot is Port Scanning Its Users

#44
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Soylent News! Really, Slashcode is just unbelievably horrible. I ran it myself. It's stupidly fragile, you can break it by altering things in the interface and it stores its weblogs in the MySQL database. I eventually moved everything to WordPress and stopped wanting to STAB MYSELF IN THE FACE REPEATEDLY whenever I wanted to make a post. Slashcode is not my favourite CMS.

>stores its weblogs in the MySQL database Can you explain this to me? this seems like exactly what wordpress does..?

I mean the Apache log!

Maybe it doesn't do that any more. BUT SOMEONE EVER THOUGHT THIS WAS A GOOD IDEA.

Re: Slashdot is Port Scanning Its Users

#45

I'm not sure what Slashdot actually is anymore. The titles of the entries appear interesting at first, but when you read the associated articles, any substantive content seems to vanish into thin air. I'm still interested, it's just not that interesting.

The draw of /. used to be its comments. Nowhere else could you get such informative discussions. often with the people involved in the story. The rating-of-comments concept has been copied by many other sites, but few of them have a user reputation system and fewer get it right. This is why I pretty much copied /. for my own site.
Post reply on HN