[CLUE-Talk] Upgrading a newer system with a current one

[David Anselmi]

JL Kottal wrote:

> What I would like to do somehow is to copy the customized system onto
> the newer computer, so that I can begin using  it and get rid of the
> old one.

Tar up the custom system and transfer the file over the network.  Then
untar on the faster machine.  You will have to double check the tar
commands to make sure you preserve file permissions, and you may want to
do some shell magic to prevent tarring things like /proc and /dev (well,
/dev may be ok to move this way).

If you have multiple partitions in the custom install, you may want to
move them as separate tar files and untar them to similar partitions in
the fast machine.  If you aren't sure how to manipulate your partitions to
wind up with the final configuration you want, tell us what you want and
what you have on the fast machine and we can provide more detail.

You can move the tar file on zip disks or via parallel port, but network
is the easiest unless you are missing cables or something.

You can also move the hard drive, partition and copy to it as desired, and
put it back.

In either case (tar file or moving the disk) you will have to run lilo
before you can boot the new custom install.  If you move the disk, lilo
will be a little trickier than otherwise.  Again, if you want more detail,
ask.

You may also get tripped up if the hardware on the two machines is
significantly different.  For example, the network card drivers are part
of the kernel, and the accelerated video drivers are part of the X server,
so if you have custom compiled those you may have to reconfigure some
things for the new hardware.

Dave



Received: from guano.org (IDENT:root@[63.215.139.46])
	by clue.denver.co.us (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA21588
	for <clue-talk at clue.denver.co.us>; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 14:28:00 -0600
Received: from 65.100.180.134 ([65.100.180.134] verified)
  by guano.org (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6)
  with ESMTP id 420058 for clue-talk at clue.denver.co.us; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 16:41:06 -0400
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 14:41:09 -0600
From: Warren <baa at guano.org>
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.51) Personal
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <1153967104.20010826144109 at guano.org>
To: CLUE-Talk Mailing List <clue-talk at clue.denver.co.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [CLUE-Talk] Security Issue with @Home
Sender: clue-talk-admin at clue.denver.co.us
Errors-To: clue-talk-admin at clue.denver.co.us
X-BeenThere: clue-talk at clue.denver.co.us
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0beta2
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: clue-talk at clue.denver.co.us
List-Id: CLUE non-technical discussions. <clue-talk.clue.denver.co.us>

If you are considering broadband service with @Home, be aware of the
following security issue of "IP address hijacking" being discussed on
Bugtraq.

Aside from the inconvenience, it is possible that someone could use your
IP address for subversive activities, trading mp3s or sending
instructions on how to rip CDs, for example, and point the finger at
you.  Refer to http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/08/23/pirate/index.html




Forwarded message:

From:    Roadkill Randu <randy at viopac.com>
To:      bugtraq at securityfocus.com <bugtraq at securityfocus.com>
Date:    Saturday, 25 August, 2001, 4:20:25 PM
Subject: @Home network subject to DHCP hijacking



======================Original message text=================

Greetings:

Problem:

The @Home network assigns IP addresses on a fairly permanent basis to its
subscribers, but it does use DHCP for IP address assignment.  It is
trivial matter, however, to take over another @Home account's IP address
by simply providing another customer's ID for the hostname parameter in
DHCP.  It is also trivial to acquire this hostname parameter, since all it
requires is 'host @HomeIPaddress' to determine what the customer ID is.

Notification:

I have notified @Home of this problem twice in the last two months.  Not
being an expert in DHCP, I do not know what could be done to fix this.  I
figure at least using something different than my actual hostname for my
hostname parameter would at least raise the bar to sniffing for DHCP
packets, instead of the trivial hack it currently is.

Reason for this message:

I have had my @Home connection hijacked from me repeatedly in the last six
months. Given @Home's aparent lack of concern for this problem, and the
current mood of ISPs shutting down users without warning whenever the MPAA
rattles it saber, I felt that the larger community needed to be aware of
this potential problem.  It should not be this trivially easy for someone
to break the law in your name.

Randy



=================End of original message text===============

-- 

 </W>

 http://guano.org/~warren/pgp.txt