If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Microsoft Technet)   Microsoft: That's a nice domain business you have there. It would be a shame if we took over your domain to stop hackers. No-IP.com: How about no? Microsoft: COURT ORDERED TAKEDOWNED   (blogs.technet.com) divider line 148
    More: Asinine, Microsoft, center of excellence, civil cases, malware, epidemics, Computer Crime  
•       •       •

6358 clicks; posted to Geek » on 01 Jul 2014 at 2:14 PM (11 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



148 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-07-01 11:35:40 AM
And people think my headlines are trolls.
 
2014-07-01 12:32:59 PM
* shakes head *  What went wrong here? (A) Subby reads at a third grade level, (b) Fark Admins read at a third grade level, (C) all the above.
 
2014-07-01 12:54:03 PM
FTFA: Of the 10 global malware disruptions in which we've been involved, this action has the potential to be the largest in terms of infection cleanup. Our research revealed that out of all Dynamic DNS providers, No-IP domains are used 93 percent of the time for Bladabindi-Jenxcus infections, which are the most prevalent among the 245 different types of malware currently exploiting No-IP domains.

Yeah, they're running a totally legitimate business subby.
 
2014-07-01 02:17:07 PM

reported: FTFA: Of the 10 global malware disruptions in which we've been involved, this action has the potential to be the largest in terms of infection cleanup. Our research revealed that out of all Dynamic DNS providers, No-IP domains are used 93 percent of the time for Bladabindi-Jenxcus infections, which are the most prevalent among the 245 different types of malware currently exploiting No-IP domains.

Yeah, they're running a totally legitimate business subby.


I'll bet it is more incompetence than malicious.
 
2014-07-01 02:21:07 PM
Yep, they dumb. They used a shortened URL on their main site for announcement. That shiat gets your site blacklisted on search engines.
 
2014-07-01 02:21:13 PM
I have a No-IP site and it's still up. I use it for absolutely nothing.
 
2014-07-01 02:21:44 PM

Intrepid00: reported: FTFA: Of the 10 global malware disruptions in which we've been involved, this action has the potential to be the largest in terms of infection cleanup. Our research revealed that out of all Dynamic DNS providers, No-IP domains are used 93 percent of the time for Bladabindi-Jenxcus infections, which are the most prevalent among the 245 different types of malware currently exploiting No-IP domains.

Yeah, they're running a totally legitimate business subby.

I'll bet it is more incompetence than malicious.


Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups?
 
2014-07-01 02:27:53 PM

Intrepid00: reported: FTFA: Of the 10 global malware disruptions in which we've been involved, this action has the potential to be the largest in terms of infection cleanup. Our research revealed that out of all Dynamic DNS providers, No-IP domains are used 93 percent of the time for Bladabindi-Jenxcus infections, which are the most prevalent among the 245 different types of malware currently exploiting No-IP domains.

Yeah, they're running a totally legitimate business subby.

I'll bet it is more incompetence than malicious.


That or laziness.  For these types of services, keeping the bad guys from exploiting your service for illegal purposes requires constant vigilance, and that doesn't come cheap.  I can easily imagine an operation like No-IP totally ignoring the problem as long as it doesn't affect their own bottom line.
 
2014-07-01 02:27:53 PM

Crudbucket: I have a No-IP site and it's still up. I use it for absolutely nothing.


What subdomain name do you use?  I lost mine.  Really annoying.
 
2014-07-01 02:32:16 PM

reported: FTFA: Of the 10 global malware disruptions in which we've been involved, this action has the potential to be the largest in terms of infection cleanup. Our research revealed that out of all Dynamic DNS providers, No-IP domains are used 93 percent of the time for Bladabindi-Jenxcus infections, which are the most prevalent among the 245 different types of malware currently exploiting No-IP domains.

Yeah, they're running a totally legitimate business subby.


NO-IP is a legitimate business.  A small number of it's users were using it for illegimate business.  The 93% figure means that 93% of this type of malware used NO-IP, not that 93% of NO-IP's business was for malware.
 
2014-07-01 02:32:28 PM
I'm too lazy to check fully but it doesn't look like to me their signup page checks for robots.
 
2014-07-01 02:33:03 PM

nitefallz: Crudbucket: I have a No-IP site and it's still up. I use it for absolutely nothing.

What subdomain name do you use?  I lost mine.  Really annoying.


Why do you even need it?
 
2014-07-01 02:33:34 PM
Takedowned?

Are we using DBZ attacks in headlines now?
 
2014-07-01 02:34:58 PM
More proof that MS are a big bunch of dicks.

It's a legit business, sure they are lazy with their security, but that's it. Microsoft is not exactly known for best security practices, how about we just kick all windows machines off the internet? I'd much more happy with that solution.

/converted yet another friend to the magical ways of kubuntu yesterday.
 
2014-07-01 02:37:29 PM

Lars The Canadian Viking: More proof that MS are a big bunch of dicks.

It's a legit business, sure they are lazy with their security, but that's it. Microsoft is not exactly known for best security practices, how about we just kick all windows machines off the internet? I'd much more happy with that solution.

/converted yet another friend to the magical ways of kubuntu yesterday.


Micro$oft am I right?
 
2014-07-01 02:42:58 PM
There's a formal statement on the No-IP web site.

They claim that MSFT never contacted them, and just went straight to the court. Re-reading MSFT's statement, they also don't say that they ever directly contacted No-IP. So it would seem that's what happened.

This means that either MSFT thought that No-IP was complicit in the malware activities that were going on, or they just figured that it was easier to get what they want from a judge. They got an ex parte order, which means that the other party (in this case, No-IP) wasn't even present at the hearing.
 
2014-07-01 02:44:56 PM
Godaddy, your days are numbered.
 
2014-07-01 02:48:54 PM

Cybernetic: There's a formal statement on the No-IP web site.

They claim that MSFT never contacted them, and just went straight to the court. Re-reading MSFT's statement, they also don't say that they ever directly contacted No-IP. So it would seem that's what happened.

This means that either MSFT thought that No-IP was complicit in the malware activities that were going on, or they just figured that it was easier to get what they want from a judge. They got an ex parte order, which means that the other party (in this case, No-IP) wasn't even present at the hearing.


My guess is that they figured that No-IP was either complicit or they would blog an announcement about MS being evil which would allow the baddies time to get out before MS could use their own DNS to track things.

MS: "Psst, No-IP. Can we take over some of your domains temporarily so we can track down some malware sites?"
No-IP: *screams*"ZOMG! M$ IS TRYING TO TOUCH MY NO-NO-PARTS!! THEY WANT ALL MY CUSTOMER INFO!!"
MS: "goddammitsomuch"

//in all fairness, MS has done little to foster trust among well, everyone
 
2014-07-01 02:49:15 PM

Intrepid00: nitefallz: Crudbucket: I have a No-IP site and it's still up. I use it for absolutely nothing.

What subdomain name do you use?  I lost mine.  Really annoying.

Why do you even need it?


They're handy if you don't want to pay the extra fees that most ISPs charge for a static IP address. I use one to access our WiFi security cameras from outside the house. Or, I should say, I did until this happened. They're not working now.

/Off to find another DDNS provider....
 
2014-07-01 02:50:32 PM
I`m ok with the gun/knife shop being closed down if they don`t take sensible precautions on whether they are selling guns or knives to people that will do bad with them.

This is just like that.
 
2014-07-01 02:53:11 PM

Because People in power are Stupid: And people think my headlines are trolls.


Far too many assholes somehow have chugged the "Microsoft = evil, Google & Apple = good" Flavor-Aid. Microsoft just took down a player in the ongoing cybercrime support business, and instead of cheering that effort, you get assholes like subby.

No-IP just got a wakeup call. Now, let's see if they get their collective shiat together and stop supporting cybercrime.
 
2014-07-01 02:55:06 PM

Intrepid00: nitefallz: Crudbucket: I have a No-IP site and it's still up. I use it for absolutely nothing.

What subdomain name do you use?  I lost mine.  Really annoying.

Why do you even need it?


I'm at noip.us. I set it up so I could connect remotely to my Raspberry Pi, and then I never got around to doing anything with it.
 
2014-07-01 02:55:52 PM

Intrepid00: nitefallz: Crudbucket: I have a No-IP site and it's still up. I use it for absolutely nothing.

What subdomain name do you use?  I lost mine.  Really annoying.

Why do you even need it?


Because I'm not paying for a static ip address through my cable provider.
 
2014-07-01 02:55:54 PM

Cybernetic: There's a formal statement on the No-IP web site.

They claim that MSFT never contacted them, and just went straight to the court. Re-reading MSFT's statement, they also don't say that they ever directly contacted No-IP. So it would seem that's what happened.

This means that either MSFT thought that No-IP was complicit in the malware activities that were going on, or they just figured that it was easier to get what they want from a judge. They got an ex parte order, which means that the other party (in this case, No-IP) wasn't even present at the hearing.


Either way, I'm happy with it. The basic thought here is "No-IP is either evil (and therefore a willing participant in cybercrime) or stupid (and therefore unable to prevent cybercrime), and, either way, legal intercession is needed." Don't see a problem here.
 
2014-07-01 02:56:31 PM

Cybernetic: Intrepid00: nitefallz: Crudbucket: I have a No-IP site and it's still up. I use it for absolutely nothing.

What subdomain name do you use?  I lost mine.  Really annoying.

Why do you even need it?

They're handy if you don't want to pay the extra fees that most ISPs charge for a static IP address. I use one to access our WiFi security cameras from outside the house. Or, I should say, I did until this happened. They're not working now.

/Off to find another DDNS provider....


Found dynu.com but seems they only offer 1 host.
 
2014-07-01 03:04:30 PM

Cybernetic: Intrepid00: nitefallz: Crudbucket: I have a No-IP site and it's still up. I use it for absolutely nothing.

What subdomain name do you use?  I lost mine.  Really annoying.

Why do you even need it?

They're handy if you don't want to pay the extra fees that most ISPs charge for a static IP address. I use one to access our WiFi security cameras from outside the house. Or, I should say, I did until this happened. They're not working now.

/Off to find another DDNS provider....


Asus routers come with a free DDNS service. You can also sign up for AWS Route 53 for .50 domain and probably a penny in lookup fees but you'll need your own domain and either update the A record yourself or a desktop and a script using their SDK to update.
 
2014-07-01 03:05:23 PM
Verizon sells telephone service to people who use it for telemarketing and phone spam people on the no call list. Maybe a big company like Comcast or Google can go to court and steal their business?

I seriously hope that the paying customers of no-ip can start a class action lawsuit over this bullshiat.
 
2014-07-01 03:07:24 PM

Lord Farkwad: Verizon sells telephone service to people who use it for telemarketing and phone spam people on the no call list. Maybe a big company like Comcast or Google can go to court and steal their business?

I seriously hope that the paying customers of no-ip can start a class action lawsuit over this bullshiat.


There could be quite a few lawsuits over this.  One of the guys in my department use a free DNS service to keep tabs on his senile grandfather who lives alone.  Had he been using no-ip and something happened to his grandfather there could be all sorts of shiatstorms.
 
2014-07-01 03:11:26 PM

nitefallz: Lord Farkwad: Verizon sells telephone service to people who use it for telemarketing and phone spam people on the no call list. Maybe a big company like Comcast or Google can go to court and steal their business?

I seriously hope that the paying customers of no-ip can start a class action lawsuit over this bullshiat.

There could be quite a few lawsuits over this.  One of the guys in my department use a free DNS service to keep tabs on his senile grandfather who lives alone.  Had he been using no-ip and something happened to his grandfather there could be all sorts of shiatstorms.


Probably not.
 
2014-07-01 03:12:50 PM

Intrepid00: nitefallz: Lord Farkwad: Verizon sells telephone service to people who use it for telemarketing and phone spam people on the no call list. Maybe a big company like Comcast or Google can go to court and steal their business?

I seriously hope that the paying customers of no-ip can start a class action lawsuit over this bullshiat.

There could be quite a few lawsuits over this.  One of the guys in my department use a free DNS service to keep tabs on his senile grandfather who lives alone.  Had he been using no-ip and something happened to his grandfather there could be all sorts of shiatstorms.

Probably not.


You're new here, aren't you?
 
2014-07-01 03:13:14 PM
Farktards will try and sell you Azure services to "replace" your no-ip hosting when you call to complain/get your host back (they've apparently misconfigured the DNS servers they are using to "filter" no-ip domains they seized).

That's can't be anywhere near legal and certainly isn't ethical.

The **BEST** outcome for Microsoft at this point is to hand over a few million after the class action lawsuit and hope people forget they did this.

I am considering a defamation lawsuit, since Microsoft claimed there were no legitimate users on no-ip.com.
 
2014-07-01 03:13:32 PM

Lord Farkwad: Verizon sells telephone service to people who use it for telemarketing and phone spam people on the no call list. Maybe a big company like Comcast or Google can go to court and steal their business?

I seriously hope that the paying customers of no-ip can start a class action lawsuit over this bullshiat.


And guess what. They get yanked all the time and the FTC shut down a VoIP provider for this.
 
2014-07-01 03:15:30 PM

nitefallz: Intrepid00: nitefallz: Lord Farkwad: Verizon sells telephone service to people who use it for telemarketing and phone spam people on the no call list. Maybe a big company like Comcast or Google can go to court and steal their business?

I seriously hope that the paying customers of no-ip can start a class action lawsuit over this bullshiat.

There could be quite a few lawsuits over this.  One of the guys in my department use a free DNS service to keep tabs on his senile grandfather who lives alone.  Had he been using no-ip and something happened to his grandfather there could be all sorts of shiatstorms.

Probably not.

You're new here, aren't you?


DNS isn't a regulated utility and unless they had a SLA you ain't getting shiat and individual only gets pennies out of that.
 
2014-07-01 03:21:17 PM

Intrepid00: I'll bet it is more incompetence than malicious.


Due.  Diligence.
 
2014-07-01 03:24:41 PM

nitefallz: Crudbucket: I have a No-IP site and it's still up. I use it for absolutely nothing.

What subdomain name do you use?  I lost mine.  Really annoying.


anon.penet.fi
 
2014-07-01 03:27:44 PM

LesserEvil: Farktards will try and sell you Azure services to "replace" your no-ip hosting when you call to complain/get your host back (they've apparently misconfigured the DNS servers they are using to "filter" no-ip domains they seized).

That's can't be anywhere near legal and certainly isn't ethical.

The **BEST** outcome for Microsoft at this point is to hand over a few million after the class action lawsuit and hope people forget they did this.

I am considering a defamation lawsuit, since Microsoft claimed there were no legitimate users on no-ip.com.


I'm considering a ham sandwich to eat while watching this thread for people that think they can actually win a suit that at best if paid account is $20 max value.
 
2014-07-01 03:28:38 PM
Try finding the damn tech support number at Microsoft... for those who are affected, call this number and ask for "Operator": 800-642-7676

At least voicing our angry concerns, and failing any resolution (that won't really happen, but perhaps we can overload their ticket system), call their legal and corporate affairs office (425-706-7863, in the parent post).

You won't get a human, probably, but if they get enough calls, it will escalate the issue.
 
2014-07-01 03:31:18 PM
I ran my home network using NoIP for 5 years, but I totally saw the malicious possibilities right off the bat. One of the most important things in the Internet business is knowing who your users are. If they are using you for bad things, you WILL be a target, and eventually, you will be shut down, one way or another.
 
2014-07-01 03:34:48 PM

PC LOAD LETTER: I ran my home network using NoIP for 5 years, but I totally saw the malicious possibilities right off the bat. One of the most important things in the Internet business is knowing who your users are. If they are using you for bad things, you WILL be a target, and eventually, you will be shut down, one way or another.


Did they not credit card check you out even robot check for sign up? DNS isn't exactly something you should let any jackass update.
 
2014-07-01 03:44:52 PM
Here's what Ars Technica has to say:

FTL:
Microsoft enforced a federal court order making the company the domain IP resolver for the No-IP domains. Microsoft said the objective of the seizure was to identify and reroute traffic associated with two malware families that abused No-IP services. Almost immediately, end users, some of which were actively involved in Internet security, castigated the move as heavy handed, since there was no evidence No-IP officially sanctioned or actively facilitated the malware campaign, which went by the names Bladabindi (aka NJrat) and Jenxcus (aka NJw0rm).

"By becoming the DNS authority for those free dynamic DNS domains, Microsoft is now effectively in a position of complete control and is now able to dictate their configuration," Claudio Guarnieri, co-founder of Radically Open Security, wrote in an e-mail to Ars Technica. "Microsoft fundamentally swept away No-IP, which has seen parts of its own DNS infrastructure legally taken away."


So, let me get this straight: No-IP provides dynamic domains that map to a computer, changing as the IP address of the computer changes. Some of these domains are mapped to computers controlling botnets. Microsoft says that No-IP is providing services to the guys managing botnets and has a judge give them a big pile of No-IP's customers and subdomains without letting No-IP know that they asked for them or letting anybody else oppose this move.

What the everloving f*ck? Since when do we let Microsoft, of all people, play Internet Sheriff on who's allowed to use what services? I thought those farkers got sued and lost for doing the same thing with Internet Explorer back in the day. Why isn't there a federal cybercrimes unit or whatever who's doing this sort of thing? How the fark does a federal judge just take away the assets of a business and give them to another business in a secret ex-parte hearing? Where the hell is the legal authority to let a judge do something like this? Goddamn, talk about judicial overreach. F*cking corporations aren't content doing Congress' job for them, now they have to do the FBI's, too?
 
2014-07-01 03:46:12 PM

Intrepid00: LesserEvil: Farktards will try and sell you Azure services to "replace" your no-ip hosting when you call to complain/get your host back (they've apparently misconfigured the DNS servers they are using to "filter" no-ip domains they seized).

That's can't be anywhere near legal and certainly isn't ethical.

The **BEST** outcome for Microsoft at this point is to hand over a few million after the class action lawsuit and hope people forget they did this.

I am considering a defamation lawsuit, since Microsoft claimed there were no legitimate users on no-ip.com.

I'm considering a ham sandwich to eat while watching this thread for people that think they can actually win a suit that at best if paid account is $20 max value.


Maybe... maybe I can wrangle an individual settlement. I realize Microsoft hands out settlements like candy, though.... and this is a particularly stupid mistake on their part. I'd take $10 or $20, even.

The problem for Microsoft was that is blatantly lied:

"Third, the balance of hardships weighs in Microsoft's favor. The Malware Defendants' criminal activities serve no legitimate purpose, and Microsoft only seeks to block traffic to the malicious sub-domains. Defendant Vitalwerks generates no known income from offering this free service. Thus, there is no hardship on Defendants or any third party."

They accused all no-ip customers of having no legitimate uses for the services - and worse, they are directing people to buy Azure services to replace the "illegitimate" service they shut down. Yeah, at the very least, No-IP is getting a payday and Microsoft will be a bit uncomfortable for a while when this gets in front of a judge who isn't on Microsoft's payroll.
 
2014-07-01 03:48:31 PM

hi13760: * shakes head *  What went wrong here? (A) Subby reads at a third grade level, (b) Fark Admins read at a third grade level, (C) all the above.


(D) Whatever drives page-views.
 
2014-07-01 03:51:34 PM

PC LOAD LETTER: I ran my home network using NoIP for 5 years, but I totally saw the malicious possibilities right off the bat. One of the most important things in the Internet business is knowing who your users are. If they are using you for bad things, you WILL be a target, and eventually, you will be shut down, one way or another.


No-ip has a security team, and will quickly shut down any malicious hosts that are identified on their domains.

There was no need for Microsoft to do this... in fact, it was done in secret, without any notice given to No-ip at all.

This is like my wife's home care company going to court, and getting a court order to take over care of a competitor's clients saying all of the clients were being abused... but instead of providing care, they merely block the care the competitor was giving - then compound the problem by trying to sell (use Azure services to replace that nasty no-ip stuff) their services to those clients.

...and all of this takes place without the competitor even being able to defend themselves in court or to take action to rectify whatever problems were occurring.
 
2014-07-01 03:51:56 PM
What was one of the domains that they lost? I want to check our rep filter.
 
2014-07-01 03:56:49 PM

LesserEvil: PC LOAD LETTER: I ran my home network using NoIP for 5 years, but I totally saw the malicious possibilities right off the bat. One of the most important things in the Internet business is knowing who your users are. If they are using you for bad things, you WILL be a target, and eventually, you will be shut down, one way or another.

No-ip has a security team, and will quickly shut down any malicious hosts that are identified on their domains.

There was no need for Microsoft to do this... in fact, it was done in secret, without any notice given to No-ip at all.

This is like my wife's home care company going to court, and getting a court order to take over care of a competitor's clients saying all of the clients were being abused... but instead of providing care, they merely block the care the competitor was giving - then compound the problem by trying to sell (use Azure services to replace that nasty no-ip stuff) their services to those clients.

...and all of this takes place without the competitor even being able to defend themselves in court or to take action to rectify whatever problems were occurring.


I don't know exactly what you are talking about but I don't think Azure has DNS service like Route 53 on AWS and I'm sure not DDNS.
 
2014-07-01 03:58:24 PM
LOL, bad gateway on two ISPs here for noip.com. Is it dead?
 
2014-07-01 04:08:34 PM
ODD........................been using Linux for 9 years and have never even once had any issues with adware, malware, viruses.etc.


Hey microsoft, wanna' get rid of malware??   redesign your OS from scratch.  don't blame others for deciding to climb into an open window.
 
2014-07-01 04:10:10 PM

phyrkrakr: Here's what Ars Technica has to say:

FTL:
Microsoft enforced a federal court order making the company the domain IP resolver for the No-IP domains. Microsoft said the objective of the seizure was to identify and reroute traffic associated with two malware families that abused No-IP services. Almost immediately, end users, some of which were actively involved in Internet security, castigated the move as heavy handed, since there was no evidence No-IP officially sanctioned or actively facilitated the malware campaign, which went by the names Bladabindi (aka NJrat) and Jenxcus (aka NJw0rm).

"By becoming the DNS authority for those free dynamic DNS domains, Microsoft is now effectively in a position of complete control and is now able to dictate their configuration," Claudio Guarnieri, co-founder of Radically Open Security, wrote in an e-mail to Ars Technica. "Microsoft fundamentally swept away No-IP, which has seen parts of its own DNS infrastructure legally taken away."

So, let me get this straight: No-IP provides dynamic domains that map to a computer, changing as the IP address of the computer changes. Some of these domains are mapped to computers controlling botnets. Microsoft says that No-IP is providing services to the guys managing botnets and has a judge give them a big pile of No-IP's customers and subdomains without letting No-IP know that they asked for them or letting anybody else oppose this move.

What the everloving f*ck? Since when do we let Microsoft, of all people, play Internet Sheriff on who's allowed to use what services? I thought those farkers got sued and lost for doing the same thing with Internet Explorer back in the day. Why isn't there a federal cybercrimes unit or whatever who's doing this sort of thing? How the fark does a federal judge just take away the assets of a business and give them to another business in a secret ex-parte hearing? Where the hell is the legal authority to let a judge do something like this? Goddamn, talk ...


If there is one thing i've learned about microsoft over the years:  they are only concerned with microsoft.  no one else.
 
2014-07-01 04:10:31 PM

Linux_Yes: ODD........................been using Linux for 9 years and have never even once had any issues with adware, malware, viruses.etc.


Hey microsoft, wanna' get rid of malware??   redesign your OS from scratch.  don't blame others for deciding to climb into an open window.


*cough* heartbleed *cough*
 
2014-07-01 04:10:48 PM

Intrepid00: LesserEvil: PC LOAD LETTER: I ran my home network using NoIP for 5 years, but I totally saw the malicious possibilities right off the bat. One of the most important things in the Internet business is knowing who your users are. If they are using you for bad things, you WILL be a target, and eventually, you will be shut down, one way or another.

No-ip has a security team, and will quickly shut down any malicious hosts that are identified on their domains.

There was no need for Microsoft to do this... in fact, it was done in secret, without any notice given to No-ip at all.

This is like my wife's home care company going to court, and getting a court order to take over care of a competitor's clients saying all of the clients were being abused... but instead of providing care, they merely block the care the competitor was giving - then compound the problem by trying to sell (use Azure services to replace that nasty no-ip stuff) their services to those clients.

...and all of this takes place without the competitor even being able to defend themselves in court or to take action to rectify whatever problems were occurring.

I don't know exactly what you are talking about but I don't think Azure has DNS service like Route 53 on AWS and I'm sure not DDNS.


No, they don't have a DNS service, which makes the suggestion a bit stupid. What Microsoft wants to sell is a replacement for that old Linux box you might have kicking around, using no-ip as a host name to serve up a web service or web pages for legitimate reasons. Azure is just the closest thing they have to a service that might replace it....
 
Displayed 50 of 148 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report