I am computer literate

[superbovine]

I got this off the CentOS mailing list, I got a good laugh from it.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/03/24/tuttle_centos/

Oklahoma city threatens to call FBI over 'renegade' Linux maker
Our mistake is YOUR problem
By Ashlee Vance in Mountain View
Published Friday 24th March 2006 20:20 GMT
New year, new job? Click here for thousands of tech vacancies.

The heartland turned vicious this week when an Oklahoma town threatened to call in the FBI because its web site was hacked by Linux maker Cent OS. Problem is CentOS didn't hack Tuttle's web site at all. The city's hosting provider had simply botched a web server.
This tale kicked off yesterday when Tuttle's city manager Jerry Taylor fired off an angry message to the CentOS staff. Taylor had popped onto the city's web site and found the standard Apache server configuration boilerplate that appears with a new web server installation. Taylor seemed to confuse this with a potential hack attack on the bustling town's IT infrastructure.

"Who gave you permission to invade my website and block me and anyone else from accessing it???," Taylor wrote to CentOS. "Please remove your software immediately before I report it to government officials!! I am the City Manager of Tuttle, Oklahoma."
Few people would initiate a tech support query like this, but these are dangerous times, and Taylor suspected the worst. (Er, but only the world's most boring hacker would break into a site and then throw up a boilerplate about how to fix the hack.)
CentOS developer Johnny Hughes jumped on the case and tried to explain the situation to Taylor.
"I feel sorry for your city," he replied in an e-mail. "CentOS is an operating system. It is probably installed on the computer that runs your website. . . . Please contact someone who does IT for you and show them the page so that they can configure your apache webserver correctly."
That response didn't go over so well.
"Get this web site off my home page!!!!! It is blocking access to my website!!!!~!," Taylor responded, clearly excited about the situation and sensing that Bin Laden was near.
Again, CentOS jumped in to try and explain some of the technical details behind the problem. It pointed Taylor to this page, saying it was the standard page for a web server and noted that it provides instructions on how to fix the problem. The CentOS staffer suggested that Taylor contact his service provider or have an administrator look into the issue.
That response didn't go over so well.
"Unless this software is removed I will file a complaint with the FBI," Taylor replied.
Later he added,
"I have four computers located at City Hall. All of these computers display the same CentOS page when attempting to bring up Tuttle-ok.gov. Now if your software is not causing this problem, how does it happen??? No one outside this building has complained about this problem. This is a block of public access to a city's website. Remove your software within the next 12 hours or an official complaint to the FBI is being filed!"
And later,
"I am computer literate! I have 22 years in computer systems engineering and operation. Now, can you tell me how to remove 'your software' that you acknowledge you provided free of charge? I consider this 'hacking.'"
After a few more exciting exchanges, CentOS managed to track down the problem for Taylor. It turns out that hosting provider Vidia Communications is running CentOS on some of its servers and had not configured the Tuttle web site properly. CentOS informed Taylor of the situation, and, a day later, Taylor had calmed down.
"The problem has been resolved by VIDIA who used to host the City website," he wrote. "They still provide cable service but do not host the website. The explanation was that they had a crash and during the rebuild they reinstalled the software that affected our website."
"I am sorry that we had to go through the process and accusations to get the problem resolved. It could have been resolved a lot quicker if the initial correspondence with you provided the helpful information that was transmitted in the last messages. My initial contact with VIDIA disallowed any knowledge of creating the problem."
Er, so despite the fact that CentOS went out of its way to figure out the problem for Tuttle, Taylor still places the blame on CentOS for not fixing the problem - that it didn't create - sooner. In addition, Taylor didn't really start off the whole process on the best foot despite Tuttle being a town "Where People Grow - Friendly!" Grow friendly, threaten to bring in the FBI at the drop of a hat - what's the difference?
As of this writing, one Tuttle web site still had not been fixed, although you can find the charming Tuttle man Taylor over here.
Taylor has yet to respond to our request for comment.
It seems that Tuttle has quite the hacking epidemic on its hands. The Tuttle Times newspaper's web site, for example, has had its Forum section cracked. Click at your own risk to see it or have a peek at our screen grab.
To see the full transcript of the web server war, travel over here. It's classic reading. ®

 

[kiwi-in-uk]

Absolutely the faults of VIDIA, CentOS and the new website host.

Regardless of whether Taylor had, or claimed to have, IT experience, those three organisations (together) supplied substandard products and services that took the internal PCs out of action and confused a paying customer.

If VIDIA's argument was that they no longer provide hosting services then why did their reinstall affect the web site?

The customer (Taylor) has every right to be worried that this can happen without his knowledge, should be annoyed that the reinstalled Apache boilerplate was not modified to contain useful contact information, should be annoyed with both organisations for substandard customer communication.

He should also upgrade his IT governance to prevent what appears to be unauthorised access by VIDIA after they stopped hosting the web site.

 

[yg17]

Absolutely the faults of VIDIA, CentOS and the new website host.

You've got to be kidding me. The one and only person who gets the blame is the host. CentOS isn't to blame. Their OS was being used, the server crashed (probably not Cent's fault and more likely faulty hardware). What could Cent do about that? The host is the only group who should get the blame...and even then, I wouldn't blame them too much because a server ****ing up is beyond their control. They should've e-mailed this jerkoff the second the site went down to tell him, however.

 

[superbovine]

Absolutely the faults of VIDIA, CentOS and the new website host.

Regardless of whether Taylor had, or claimed to have, IT experience, those three organisations (together) supplied substandard products and services that took the internal PCs out of action and confused a paying customer.

bahahahahahah...

First off, CentOS isn't a sub-standard product is it a clone of redhat enterprise. Second, the software part of CentOS in question was a apache server which is the same code that runs on OS X. The next thing was the server was configured incorrectly due to a crash which has nothing to with CentOS being substandard because redhat enterprise/centos runs a lot of very big projects in this world and has garnered a great reputation. I imagine a lot of things you use everyday from using your ATM card to surfing the web probably runs through a redhat/centos box at some point several times a day. Granted the OS did crash, but everything in this world has a failure rate. The problem was the person complaining was ignorant to his situation and didn't understand the simplistic nature of the problem, and as the author of the article alludes the manager probably feels like a dumbass once the real solution was presented due to his non-responsive nature. If he didn't make a complaint to the FBI once their tech division got a hold of it they would probably laughed in his face because the problem was a configuration and not some evil plot.

 

[kiwi-in-uk]

You both miss the point:

The CentOS system should not present an end user with a cryptic technical message - whether in a system recovery situation or on a new install. If there is the slghtest chance that the Apache boilerplate could be seen by an end user then it should be modified by the system distributor or installer to provide end user instructions. To a technically naive user the boilerplate is akin to a BSOD. It seems that we have not made much progress over the past 20 years.

The CentOS support people tried to explain system issues to someone who (while he might well have expertise in other IT technologies) clearly had no knowledge of Apache.

VIDIA denied responsibility, then admitted that their crash and subsequent reinstall had in fact affected the web site.

So ... (1) a deficient system [allowing users to see cryptic screens without offering any explanation] ... (2) allowing technical staff - however well meaning - to talk to an obvious technical naïf [big mistake!!!] ... (3) the other crowd mismanaging the web site software.

 

[superbovine]

You both miss the point:

The CentOS system should not present an end user with a cryptic technical message - whether in a system recovery situation or on a new install. If there is the slghtest chance that the Apache boilerplate could be seen by an end user then it should be modified by the system distributor or installer to provide end user instructions. To a technically naive user the boilerplate is akin to a BSOD. It seems that we have not made much progress over the past 20 years.

The CentOS support people tried to explain system issues to someone who (while he might well have expertise in other IT technologies) clearly had no knowledge of Apache.

VIDIA denied responsibility, then admitted that their crash and subsequent reinstall had in fact affected the web site.

So ... (1) a deficient system [allowing users to see cryptic screens without offering any explanation] ... (2) allowing technical staff - however well meaning - to talk to an obvious technical naïf [big mistake!!!] ... (3) the other crowd mismanaging the web site software.

Taylor had popped onto the city's web site and found the standard Apache server configuration boilerplate that appears with a new web server installation. Taylor seemed to confuse this with a potential hack attack on the bustling town's IT infrastructure.

Please explain to me how the Apache boilerplate is confusing and warrants a call to the fbi to force someone to uninstall software that they didn't install in the first place. if you read the page, it does tell exactly what the person should do which was in the end the correct answer. there isn't anything cryptic about it. it spells out in plain english what to do, for a non-technical person to handle the situation.

This page is here because the site administrator has changed the configuration of this web server. Please contact the person responsible for maintaining this server with questions. The Apache Software Foundation, which wrote the web server software this site administrator is using, has nothing to do with maintaining this site and cannot help resolve configuration issues.

Let's see here...

"The problem has been resolved by VIDIA who used to host the City website," he wrote. "They still provide cable service but do not host the website. The explanation was that they had a crash and during the rebuild they reinstalled the software that affected our website."

hmmm....CentOS is to blame because of Apache cryptic message? oh wait, let us disregard the fact the CentOS went beyond the call of duty to find out the problem for free. I generally charge $25/hr.

 

[kiwi-in-uk]

So if he was seeing the standard Apache boilerplate, why would he call CentOS? Somewhere in his frustration and confusion some form of documentation led him to CentOS.

And why on earth did a CentOS tech expert try to deal with an irate end user?

I applaud CentOS for "going beyond the call of duty" (and I would probably have charged for it myself, but not at the same rate that you charge) but I maintain that the whole debacle could have been averted from the response to the first email to CentOS and should have been handled better by all three vendors involved.

I might not have used the same approach as the customer in this case, but I have seen enough vendor avoidance behaviours to understand why this guy got very frustrated very quickly.

 

[Stella]

After reading some of the messages in this thread, it appears that dear old Jerry Taylor is not the only one who has dreams of being 'computer literate'....

Here is the boiler plate in question...
http://centos.hughesjr.com/testing/noindex_new.html

Hardly cryptic.

CentOS indeed went over the call of duty, as the boiler plate says, CentOS is not responsible, and cannot be, for website installations ( assuming the distro works OK )....and explicitly states:

"Note:

CentOS is an Operating System and it is used to power this website; however, the webserver is owned by the domain owner and not the CentOS Project. If you have issues with the content of this site, contact the owner of the domain, not the CentOS project.

Unless this server is on the CentOS.org domain, the CentOS Project doesn't have anything to do with the content on this webserver or any e-mails that directed you to this site."

 

[Queso]

It must be really sh*tty being an FBI agent these days. Every little thing that goes wrong through error is attributed to CRIME and/or TERRORISM. They must hate to waste their time on this type of crap when I'm sure there's way more important stuff they could be doing.

Soon it'll be the cry of every child in the playground. "Ouch, you hit me. I'm calling the FBI!!"

 

[saabmp3]

So if he was seeing the standard Apache boilerplate, why would he call CentOS? Somewhere in his frustration and confusion some form of documentation led him to CentOS.

And why on earth did a CentOS tech expert try to deal with an irate end user?

I applaud CentOS for "going beyond the call of duty" (and I would probably have charged for it myself, but not at the same rate that you charge) but I maintain that the whole debacle could have been averted from the response to the first email to CentOS and should have been handled better by all three vendors involved.

I might not have used the same approach as the customer in this case, but I have seen enough vendor avoidance behaviours to understand why this guy got very frustrated very quickly.

Re-read the email conversation. First off, the CentOS guy didn't know who the third parties were, he had to investigate himself to find out. Second, it's not his responsability, he did it to help out.

I'm starting to think that kiwi is actually Jerry.....

Ben

 

[greatdevourer]

How long before someone from the community actually breaks in and changes the homepage to:

OMG J00 G0T PWND B1 CENT0S!!1!1!

 

[Lyle]

After reading some of the messages in this thread, it appears that dear old Jerry Taylor is not the only one who has dreams of being 'computer literate'...

Heh.

 

[Don't panic]

from his resume on that web site, he has 22 years experience as project manager at Raytheon, which develops defense and missile systems.

we are in good hands.

 

[Lyle]

from his resume on that web site, he has 22 years experience as project manager at Raytheon, which develops defense and missile systems.

No, he has 22 years of experience as a Program Manager at Raytheon. Speaking as someone who works in the defense industry, I can assure you that (a) there's a big difference between the titles "project manager" and "program manager", and (b) the fact that he was a long-time program manager explains a lot.

 

[Don't panic]

No, he has 22 years of experience as a Program Manager at Raytheon. Speaking as someone who works in the defense industry, I can assure you that (a) there's a big difference between the titles "project manager" and "program manager", and (b) the fact that he was a long-time program manager explains a lot.

pheew. good.
thanks Lyle, I feel better now.

 

[yg17]

You both miss the point:

The CentOS system should not present an end user with a cryptic technical message - whether in a system recovery situation or on a new install. If there is the slghtest chance that the Apache boilerplate could be seen by an end user then it should be modified by the system distributor or installer to provide end user instructions. To a technically naive user the boilerplate is akin to a BSOD. It seems that we have not made much progress over the past 20 years.

The CentOS support people tried to explain system issues to someone who (while he might well have expertise in other IT technologies) clearly had no knowledge of Apache.

VIDIA denied responsibility, then admitted that their crash and subsequent reinstall had in fact affected the web site.

So ... (1) a deficient system [allowing users to see cryptic screens without offering any explanation] ... (2) allowing technical staff - however well meaning - to talk to an obvious technical naïf [big mistake!!!] ... (3) the other crowd mismanaging the web site software.

What cryptic screen? The standard Apache page, as linked to a few posts up, is about as un-cryptic as you can get. It explains what's going on to both the server admin and end user, and tells the server admin how to fix the problem.

 

[superbovine]

And why on earth did a CentOS tech expert try to deal with an irate end user?

If the FBI was called they would have to pay for a lawyer to help deal with an idiotic person perception of the situation. I imagine if agents showed up at your resident asking question about "hacking" a city website, although their tech division might head it off at the pass, but any rational person would get a lawyer involved if they had agents questioning them about their company.

 

[jeremy.king]

No, he has 22 years of experience as a Program Manager at Raytheon. Speaking as someone who works in the defense industry, I can assure you that (a) there's a big difference between the titles "project manager" and "program manager", and (b) the fact that he was a long-time program manager explains a lot.

Six Sigma calls projects programs. Raytheon uses Six Sigma. I don't think there is any difference. Doesn't matter what the hell he did, he's still an idiot.

 

[Lyle]

Doesn't matter what the hell he did, he's still an idiot.

Well, on this we can agree.

 

[Lyle]

The Saga Continues...

From The Register:

Jerry Taylor, the now famous city manager of Tuttle, Oklahoma, who last week threatened to call the FBI to stop Linux maker CentOS from helping him configure a web server has presented The Register with a massive request. Taylor wants us to shut down the internet...

Taylor declined to respond to this reporter's request for comment but did write to a member of El Reg's marketing team:

"I do not follow instructions that show up when a website that I am not familiar with appears on my computer and I do not think anyone with experience would do so either... Now I am being flooded with emails from CentOS users that after knowing the answer say the problem was simple. I think this is unjustified and would like for this to stop... Your attention to this matter is greatly appreciated."

There is, of course, more in the full article.
Link

 

[Diatribe]

This guy is hilarious. Oh and could you guys ask The Register to make it stop raining too plz?

 

[eva01]

hahahah this is getting better and better

 

[Sdashiki]

Elected officials. Gotta love em.

/burn

 

[superbovine]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/03/27/tuttle_email/page2.html

Also, the guy uses Comic Sans to deliver his bio. What a tool.

http://www.centos.org/modules/news/article.php?storyid=127

If you will not let me help you, find someone you know who is computer
literate and has heard of Linux to look at your problem. I am trying
very, very hard to save you from great embarrassment.

oh the irony...