text:
New Cases
HSBC Bank v. James L. Shannon Jr., et al; foreclosure sought against property on Lisbon Street, East Liverpool.
Wells Fargo Bank v. Emory Wright, et al; foreclosure sought against property on Pleasant Street, East Liverpool.
Jean G. Campbell of Chester, W.Va., v. Darryl W. Brinkley of Wellsville; collection sought of child support.
Bethaney Chellis of Damascus v. Todd Chellis of Leetonia; divorce sought.
Docket Entries
U.S. Bank Trust v. Louise Melott, et al; foreclosure ordered against property on Fox Chase Road, East Liverpool.
U.S. Bank Trust v. Wendy A. Baker, et al; defendant filed bankruptcy, so lawsuit put on hold.
David K. Gamble of East Liverpool v. Patty S. Gamble of Youngstown; divorce granted.


text:
In 1915 President Woodrow Wilson established Dinosaur National Monument, to preserve 150 million year old dinosaur fossil beds, discovered by paleontologist Earl Douglass in 1909. In 1938 the monument boundaries were expanded from the original 80 acres area surrounding the fossil beds—now known as Douglass Quarry—to over 200,000 acres.
The monument also preserves cultural history that dates back 10,000 years. Native American petroglyphs and pictographs provide evidence that many groups have made this arid land their home. The Fremont Indians lived in the canyons 800 - 1,200 years ago, followed by the Ute and Shoshone, who still reside in the area today.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Clinicians continue to search for that one test, the one biomarker that will help them diagnose, prognosticate, and treat specific syndromes. Heart failure is undoubtedly one of those syndromes. All physicians who treat patients with heart failure seek a robust marker for this syndrome, and some may wonder, with the mounting evidence on brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), is such a biomarker finally here?
The current status of BNP in heart failure has been the result of an important historic journey. In 1981, de Bold et al1 injected myocardial homogenates into nondiuretic rats. The atrial muscle extract increased sodium and chloride excretion 30-fold, along with an impressive increase in urine volume. By 1985, this same group had identified specific granules that secreted the peptide, now known as atrial natriuretic factor (ANF), and noted that the substance also had a hypotensive effect and an inhibitory action on renin and aldosterone secretion.2 Thus, the heart was behaving as an endocrine organ. The investigators noted that the inability of the kidney to excrete sodium in chronic heart failure could be related to ANF and that the peptide might hold promise in the therapy for both hypertension and heart failure. Francis et al3 subsequently described the elevation of ANF early in heart failure and surprisingly in patients with asymptomatic left ventricular dysfunction. Several years later in 1988, Sudoh et al,4 from Japan, isolated an ANF-like peptide from mammalian brain tissue that had similar properties to ANF but was distinct in its amino acid sequence, hence the name brain natriuretic peptide. These investigators suggested that in human disease, both ANF and BNP might perhaps have a dual mechanistic action in sodium and volume homeostasis.
Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.
Download citation file:
Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.
More Listings atJAMACareerCenter.com >
The Rational Clinical Examination: Evidence-Based Clinical Diagnosis
Original Article: Does This Dyspneic Patient in the Emergency Department Have Congestive Heart Failure?
The Rational Clinical Examination: Evidence-Based Clinical Diagnosis
All results at
JAMAevidence.com >
Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a link to reset your password.
Enter your username and email address. We'll send instructions on how to reset your password to the email address we have on record.
Need assistance?
Athens and Shibboleth are access management services that provide single sign-on to protected resources. They replace the multiple user names and passwords necessary to access subscription-based content with a single user name and password that can be entered once per session. It operates independently of a user's location or IP address. If your institution uses Athens or Shibboleth authentication, please contact your site administrator to receive your user name and password.


text:
A 57-year-old woman shot overnight in a Norman home has died Thursday.
Photos: Police investigating Norman woman's shooting death
Gray or silver Dodge Caliber soughtUPDATED 9:49 AM CDT Sep 13, 2012
CommentsThe views expressed are not those of this site, this station or its affiliated companies. By posting your comments you agree to accept our terms of use.blog comments powered by Disqus


text:
Where do people find live bootlegs
I really enjoyed watching Portishead and Fuck Buttons set on TV from Glastonbury this weekend, I'd've considered the actual festival but I like to shit in a normal toilet and sleep in a bed at night, ( Thanks ATP for spoiling me the last 7 years)
Bt I'd like a rip of those two sets....thoughts? Ideas?
Really, that's helpful
Thank you.
nae bother


text:
The Atlanta Falcons are 3-1 coming off their bye week and it looks like there isn't much that will slow them down in the coming weeks.
We're used to seeing big names show up in the postgame recaps, i.e. Matt Ryan and Roddy White. But Sunday's game involved much more than star power.
New players are starting to step up everyday, which bodes well for the rest of 2011 and, potentially, 2012.
I may be getting ahead of myself, but with contributions like we saw in Week 12, there's a promising aura surrounding Atlanta.
Let's take a look at those who stood out this past Sunday.


text:
Windows Shellcode Locations and Buffer Overflows
bY suN8Hclf | crimsoN_Loyd9
DaRk-CodeRs Group production, kid
09/03/2008 (English version)
The first method
The second method
The third method
This is not just another paper describing basics of buffer overflows. There are lots of publications about this topic, therefore it does not make any sense to describe it again. If you are familar with exploiting buffer overflows on Windows platform, do not think that this article has nothing to offer you. It shows some interesting methods, which can be used during writing an exploit (for example: where to put shellcode when stack is non-executable). Basic knowledge of x86 processors, Assembly and C languages and buffer overflows exploitation are required.
The ability to overflow a buffer on the stack, gives us the full control over the EIP register of x86 processor. Yep!!! This is great!!! We can load this register with every address we want, and then force a vulnerable program to jump there and to execute code that is at that address.
The problem occures when we want to execute the code, which WE want to be executed and not the code, which is actualy in the memory. To achive it, we have got to place OUR code in the memory of process we are attacking. This code is known as shellcode and it consists of a set of instructions for processor, additionaly encoded in their hex values.
In this paper I will discuss three possible locations in memory, where we can put our shellcode and than, how to force the vulnerable application to execute it. During this tutorial we will be using two shellcodes, of different size.
The first, written by me:
1. Loads user32.dll library to process memory
2. Calls MessageBoxA
3. Calls ExitProcess(0) to terminate process
The second, was generated in Metasploit Framework. It binds Windows shell (cmd.exe) to port 4444.
Three methods (possible locations in memory) I will describe are the following:
1. On the stack, behind the buffer that smashes the stack(so behind
the return address).
2. In buffer, which overflows buffer on the stack
3. In TEB block
0x01 Shellcodes
The first shellcode (64 bytes)
char shellcode[]=
00401B7C EB 02 JMP SHORT vuln.00401B80
The second shellcode(399 bytes)
// win32_bind - Encoded Shellcode [\x00\x0a\x09] [ EXITFUNC=seh LPORT=4444 Size=399 ]http://site.com/
Here is a code of the vuln.c program, which we'll be attacking using three methods:
================================================== ================================
|To make our think much simpler, let's assume that 620 bytes is |
|the maximum size of data that DOES NOT overwrite return address on the stack. |
================================================== ================================
The first method
This is probably the most popular and the most simple method. We fill entire buffer (620 bytes) with "chunk", the return address we overwrite with jump(call, jmp), and then we place our shellcode. The buffer, which exploits the vuln.c program with this method looks like it:
[620 bytes of chunk][jmp esp, call esp][some NOP's][shellcode]
We assume that ESP register points to our shellcode during overflow (shellcode is on the top of the stack).
Here is the exploit:
Our shellcode must be SMALL. If you use long shellcode (for example the second one from this paper) it will be cut. Therefore using this method we won't force the vuln.c program to execute or second shellcode. To do it we have got to use the second method.
The second method
To execute long shellcodes we need much more place: 399 bytes + NOP sledge (in our example). If the buffer in an application, which we are attacking, is big (620 bytes in vuln.c), we can place THERE our shellcode and jump to the begining of our code in buffer. This is how most of exploits for linux < 2.6 works. Buffer looks like it:
[NOP sledge][REAL SHELLCODE][call esp, jmp esp][some NOP's][MINI SHELLCODE]
As you can see, we have got to use two shellcode's:
REAL SHELLCODE -> this is our shellcode, which we want to be executed
MINI SHELLCODE -> this is a small shellcode, which will be executed with
the first method. It will only jump to the REAL SHELLCODE.
In our example (vuln.c) the ECX register points to the end of buffer.
Therefore we can use it, to jump at the beggining of the buffer.
We can do it by:
dec ch
dec ch
jmp ecx
Of course, you may need to change it. The most important thing is that the ECX register, must point to the NOP sledge before REAL SHELLCODE after the execution of MINI SHELLCODE.
0x05 The third method
If the stack memory was configured to firbid the execution of code that is placed on it, we have to choose another place to store our shellcode. We can, for example, choose TEB block. Every block has 520 bytes buffer used during Unicode to ASCII strings conversion. This buffer is shiffted(placed) 0xC00 bytes from the beggining of TEB block. The TEB block of the first process's thread has address 0x7FFDE000 so the free buffer for our shellcode is at 0x7FFDEC00 (0x7FFDE000 + 0xC00). Becouse this address ends with NULL byte, we should change it to, for example, 0x7FFDEC04. But here is a trap. If our exploit did use any function that uses the buffer in TEB block for conversion between Unicode and ASCII, the attacked process would probably crash down and our shellcode would not be executed.
Too bad...
But there are some others free locations in TEB block that are not used. For example, starting from 0x7FFDE1BC there is a buffer containing only NULL bytes, which we can overwrite. So this is how our buffer, which will be sent to vuln.c, looks like:
[NOP sledge][shellcode][some NOPs][STR_FUNC][STR_FUNC_RET][DEST_BUF][SRC_BUF]
STR_FUNC (620-624 bytes) -> the address of function, which will be used to copy our NOP sledge+shellcode to TEB block (lstrcpyA or lstrcatA).
STR_FUNC_RET (624-628 bytes) -> the return address for STR_FUNC. In our example we are jumping to our buffer with shellcode at 0x7FFDE1BC.
DEST_BUF (628-632 bytes) -> address of the location where we are copying our shellcode.
TEB block (0x7FFDE1BC) in our case.
SRC_BUF (632-636 bytes) -> the address from which we are copying our code. In our example, we copy NOP sledge and shellcode. Get this address from vuln.c program.
And the third exploit:
> netstat -a
you should see opened port -> 4444. Good...
Our shellcode should be less than 520 bytes long, to not to overflow the next TEB or PEB block.
The three methods presented in this paper are quite useful during writting the buffer overflows exploit.
If you guys have any ideas that u want me to write about plz dont hesitate to ask me i have over like 250 tutorials that i have made and have been posting all across diffrent forums so u have any tut that u want to see just ask me
All comments, sugestions, questions -> send to:
suN8Hclf[at]vp{dot}pl OR crimson{dot}loyd[at]gmail{dot}com
Re: Windows Shellcode Locations and Buffer Overflows
Really nice and explanatory
Re: Windows Shellcode Locations and Buffer Overflows
thankyou mate
Re: Windows Shellcode Locations and Buffer Overflows
Yeah, really c00l paper XXxxImmortalxxXX ...
Wish, it is yours...
I see that you are too stupid to play with
computers so get another hobby. And if dont have
enough knowledge to write a good paper based on your own
research dont copy others work. If the are doing it,
just copy the ENTIRE paper and dont act as an author, fucker...
And to all guys who had already read this paper above:
The oryginall paper can be found at:
Besh Wishes
Re: Windows Shellcode Locations and Buffer Overflows
lol ohhhh booo whooooooo wow i forgot to add the user who made this im so sry GO CRY ME A RIVER.
And just to actually tell the real user who made this was not from packetstrom it was actually made by another user that i do not wish to state. and the hell with packetstorm they never made this. they just copied and pasted it.
as for the shellcode script it was a user i know that sent it to milw0rm and milw0rm posted hence there e-mail firstname.lastname@example.com
and actually u know i could care less if i wrote this tutorial i just posted it for i guess users like u that love buffers so much.
*slowly walking away*
Re: Windows Shellcode Locations and Buffer Overflows
Let me know what needs to added and I will add it for you.
|All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 04:15.


text:
To anyone who watched F1 back in the 1990s, or if you're simply a fan of the history of F1, let's discuss a hypothetical situation.
If Ayrton Senna hadn't been killed at Imola in 1994, who would've come out on top in their epic battle that season and beyond?
Personally, I think Ayrton would've won at Imola and gone on to win the 1994 championship. I mean, if Damon Hill would almost win the championship then Ayrton would surely have won, since Hill was a slower driver than Ayrton.
I think it would've been one hell of a close season between them. I also think Senna would've won the 1995, 1996 and 1997 championships, possibly before going to Ferrari to finish his career. Perhaps Schuey wouldn't be the legend he is now if Senna had lived.
What do you think?
Ayrton Senna vs Michael Schumacher if Senna hadn't been killed
|Posted on
|Take our short survey, £100 of Amazon vouchers to be won!
There is no way Senna would have won the 94, 95, 96 and 97 championships. That's an incredibly romantic view of how good Senna was. He was good, but he was wasn't some form of god that could pull a win out of nowhere every race.
Saying that though, Senna probably would have won another title or two, but I still think Schumacher would have had roughly the same amount of titles as he does now anyway. (The lack of Senna's death could have had plenty of knock on effects, such as JV not getting a drive in 96/97, etc).
(Original post by CB91)
That's an incredibly romantic view of how good Senna was. He was good, but he was wasn't some form of god that could pull a win out of nowhere every race.
(Original post by Raving_Hippy)
Williams had the best car from 1995 to 1997, and for the second half of 1994 once they got the car sorted. So I reckon it'd have been a forgone conclusion that Senna would've won the championship in those years.
Senna WAS godlike as a driver. Witness his drive at Donnington 1993 in the wet or Interlagos 1993 where he beat much faster cars in an under-powered McLaren Ford, for example.
Button won in the wet at Canada '11 and Hungary '11 beating the much faster Red Bull, so he's a god like driver as well then? No, Senna was good, but not that good.
Agree with CB91, he was good but not that good. That view of him has just come about after his death because naturally when great sportsmen die early people always say how they would have achieved x more titles/championships etc.
In fact at the time he was often under a lot of scrutiny (much like Hamilton is nowadays, not that I'm comparing the two, that'd be an insult to Senna) because his do-or-die attitude used to sometimes compromise his races and end up in crashes.
I think it's just a personal thing. Being the type of fan I am I know that if I had been watching F1 (and old enough to appreciate it) back then I would have been a Prost supporter over Senna. Interestingly enough only recently Sir Jackie Stewart named his top 5 greatest drivers of all time and Prost was on it whilst Senna wasn't.
Another point is about how people have a go at Schumacher for winning the championship by hitting Damon, but everybody seems to forget that both Prost and Senna won their titles doing exactly the same in Suzuka '89 and '90. But of course nobody's allowed to talk about that, those titles were deserved, but Schumi's weren't. People also forget that when Senna won his '88 title, Prost had actually secured more points that season.
I remember last year people spoke about Vettel's poor pole:win conversion rate (even though most of it was down to poor reliability) and yet everybody forgets Senna's ratio.
But regardless he is a triple world champion with 41 wins, on that ground alone there's no doubt he is one of the greats. But Schumacher for me is one of the greatest sportsman (not just F1 driver) of all time. There's a reason why both Tiger Woods and Roger Federer unanimously agreed that the leading sportsman in the world (out of them and others like Tendulkar etc.) is Schumacher.
That's like asking would Micheal Schumacher have won 7 titles if he hadn't of had the Ferrari that was the fastest car on the grid for a good 3/4 years.
BRB, just get my can of worms...
Senna was something else, however, 7 titles speaks for itself. No other driver has come close to 7 for a good reason.
Senna was extremely talented, but his 1994 season started poorly indeed. Whilst he clearly had the pace, it was clear that race pace wasn't great. Due to the safety changes after Imola, perhaps the season would have gone differently, but Schumacher's Benetton was the better overall car, legally, or not.
Senna WAS that good, it's just that, as time went on, it became more about the car and the technology than the driver. While Williams was ahead of McLaren in terms of performance in 1991/2/3, Williams had really slipped in 1994 and Benetton was using technology they shouldn't have had.
I doubt Senna would have continued for much longer after 1994, I genuinely think he'd have called it a day at the end of that season, or sometime in 1995.
(Original post by JOR2010)
Senna was extremely talented, but his 1994 season started poorly indeed. Whilst he clearly had the pace, it was clear that race pace wasn't great. Due to the safety changes after Imola, perhaps the season would have gone differently, but Schumacher's Benetton was the better overall car, legally, or not.
Oh please.
Williams car was much quicker!
This has been discussed to death: I urge you to check out Autosport forums.
(Original post by JOR2010)
Oh please. Everyone knows Williams had a dip in form in 94, Benetton had the better car, whether legal, or not.
(Original post by f1mad)
I'm not gonna bother arguing this. Check Autosport forums and use its search tool .
(Original post by JOR2010)
Just because you've read the Autosport forums doesn't mean an argument is correct. The fact is, although Senna's qualifying pace was always good, his in race form wasn't as good as Schumacher's. It is known that Senna was complaining about the performance of the Williams in the first few races.
(Original post by JOR2010)
I'm not interested in the Autosport forums. My decision is based on the countless articles, videos, races, reports I've read about the 1994 and surrounding seasons. The Benetton was the better car in 1994, and in 1995.
But fair enough.
(Original post by f1mad)
More like you don't want to see a good debate in which you're wrong .
But fair enough.
i dont think there will ever be a driver quite the same as senna... it is incomparible the way he drove that car, i recently watched the movie 'Senna' and i just couldnt believe the way he controlled the car, you could see that it was pushed beyond the limits of its capabilities and was constantly twitching. For me schummacher is too on rails, yes he is a fantastic driver there is no taking that away from him but i really dont think you can compare the two. And in respect for Ayrton i dont think he should be compared, he was quoted by Lauda as 'the best racing driver that ever lived' and i think we should let the proffesionals speak for what they know best.
Submit reply
RegisterThanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post Already a member? Sign in
Oops, something wasn't right
please check the following: