What is in Kelvin's Head?

  • Under attack

    Some people will have noticed that some of the websites that I look after have been under attack this week. Naughty people are trying to gain control of a load of web servers and mine has been one of the many targeted.

    What has been happening is that someone has had the great idea of trying to crack as many WordPress sites using a brute force attack. That means setting computers up to try to log in to a site automatically using a computer program to try as many different password combinations as possible. The same technique was a feature in the film War Games of some years ago – the computer in question being the one which controlled US Missiles. My computers have slightly less power.

    People do this to gain control of servers so they can do naughty things like use them to send out lots of spam all at once. (Ever wondered where it came from?)

    The consequence for my readers this week is that at some times, my websites have been showing up in various security systems (Norton, AVG) as infected and this meant that people couldn’t get access to the sites whilst this protection was in use.

    I think I’ve nipped it all in the bud.

    For anyone experiencing the same trouble, here’s some of what you can do to help.

    • Change the password combination on your server.
    • Change the password combination on your blog/WordPress installation.
    • Install a plugin like Anti-Malware and use it to scan and remove malicious code that has been injected into your site.
    • Install a plugin like Better WP Security and word through what it recommends. At the very least, make sure you don’t have your administrator account in the name “admin” and use the plugin to lock down your login screen – you can set it to ban an incoming IP address after 10 failed attempts to log in, for example.
    • Don’t panic.

    For anyone who isn’t having the same trouble, consider doing the security things anyway.

    , , , , ,

10 responses to “So, let me get this right…”

  1. Andrew Page Avatar
    Andrew Page

    I think you have understood if correctly (or at least as fully as it can be understood).

    This just shows how confused the church has become, or how keen it is to tie itself into the proverbial knots to appease both progressives and traditionalists.

    Either way, this position is both absurd and intellectually unsustainable.

    Reply
  2. Kirstin Avatar
    Kirstin

    Kelvin can I ask what submissions you are referring to, is there a new one?

    Reply
  3. Joan H Craig Avatar
    Joan H Craig

    I think that, once marriage law is passed, current civil partnerships can convert to marriage by filling form, etc. Don’t think they said what happens if the couple want a religious marriage – or did I miss that?
    If our churches persist in saying no to marriage, wouldn’t it be better to do the blessing after they’ve converted their civil status – as in some countries where every marriage is a civil ceremony, and any religious service is done afterwards
    I hope everyone has completed the most recent consultation paper

    Reply
  4. Rhea Avatar
    Rhea

    I think that the church wants to have its cake and eat it too. It wants everyone to be happy, and this is probably the best way that it knows to do this.

    Is it ridiculous? Of course.

    Reply
  5. Kelvin Holdsworth Avatar
    Kelvin Holdsworth

    There is to be a new one. I’ve not seen it. I understand that the position that the Faith and Order Board is holding to is that “church teaching” is what Canon 31 says – that and nothing else and therefore we are doctrinally against change.

    Is that not the case?

    Reply
    1. kelvin Avatar
      kelvin

      So far as I understand it, the SEC has not moved in its position since the first response at all.

      The first response included this:
      Question 10: Do you agree that the law in Scotland should be changed to allow same sex marriage?
      The Canons of the Scottish Episcopal Church (Canon 31) state that the doctrine of the Church is that marriage is ‘a physical, spiritual and mystical union of one man and one woman created by their mutual consent of heart, mind and will thereto, and as a holy and lifelong estate instituted of God’. In the light of that Canon, there is no current basis for agreeing that the law should be changed to view marriage as possible between two people of the same sex.

      Reply
    2. Kirstin Avatar
      Kirstin

      The SEC’s last response was in line with what the current law was, indeed still is, this consultation asks a very different question. To which the answer ‘well it isn’t legal, so we can’t say’, (I paraphrase) can’t be the answer this time, can it?
      Of course Canon 31 also states it is a “lifelong estate” but had clause 4 added at a later date to allow for divorce and remarriage.

      Reply
  6. Rev David Coleman Avatar
    Rev David Coleman

    I was watching the evidence to the Westminster parliamentary committees the other day. In all these things, even from churches which are prepared to be tentatively in favour, or declining to be opposed, what is missing from all the evidence is the human experience of joy and delight that actually characterises a true and good wedding, of any combination of partners. How can we get across the compelling and converting happiness when processes take the form they do?

    Reply
  7. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    Is there any way of getting hold of the board – of ordinary church members getting hold of it and making it listen?? I mean I know my approach tends to lack in subtlety what it makes up for in directness, but then, well, it is very direct.

    Reply
  8. Kimberly Avatar
    Kimberly

    Rosemary, of all the many beautiful sentences you have written, that is the very very best.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • 6'U

    Last night’s episode of Six Feet Under did end with a surprising thud. What I could not really come to terms with was the Quakers in the Quaker Meeting sitting in pews in rows. Are there really Quakers who don’t face one another in meeting? Their singing of Holly Near’s song “Singing for our Lives”…

  • Sermon – 2 October 2005

    One of the things that we are being asked as Christian people more and more, is to tell people how to live. We used to be the ones who were there to tell people how to come close to God, and many of us still want to do that. The trouble is, people think that…

  • Which saint are you?

    Here is the result of a quiz which is doing the rounds at the moment. The odd thing is that I've actually been to the tomb of St Athanasius in Cairo. More details in wikipedia here:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athanasius (The tomb itself was rather smelly). You are Athanasius! You are willing to fight alosing battle, just to make sure that the truthis…

  • Theology Flamb

    Perhaps the most impressive thing that I've seen this week was someone set fire to a mushroom stroganoff  (which had been doused in brandy) whilst conducting a rather complicated theological debate with me which began at the General Synod earlier in June.The question is over whether baptism is a pre-requisite of admission to communion. The…