"Cybe R. Wizard" Cybe_R_Wizard@WizardsTower wrote in message
news:20031106103352.3e978bb0.Cybe_R_Wizard@Wizards Tower...
On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 09:54:39 -0500
"BenignVanilla" wrote:

As for security and MS virus', I speculate that if Linux was on 90% of
the workstations in the world, we'd be reading about more Linux
virus'. I agree that MS has been lax in it's security and
vulnerability protection, but surely the number of machines running
the OS make it a good statistical target. Why attack a small number of
computer savvy people if I can attack a larger group not so savvy
users?

BV.

Because one would have to logged in as root (/) which is the number one
no-no in the Linux world, just as in the Unix world. Otherwise a
cracker would need your root password which is fairly well protected.
As an IT professional I'm surprised you even asked. Unless, of course,
your IT career is mostly using Microsoft products? Not that this is a
bad thing. A whole lot of the internet would disappear if Microsoft
products suddenly did likewise.

If you think the only way to hack at Unix is the root password, then you are
fooling yourself. There are more vulnerabilities then just a simple password
compromise. My career has been centered around MS, I will happily admit to
that. I do a lot of client server design and implementation and being an
integrator the MS platform is a joy to work with.

Just let me reiterate. I am not anti-Unix. I think Unix is fantastic, I am
just against bashing MS to bash MS. Both platforms has strengths and
weaknesses.

Both sink when tossed into your pond.

BV.

"Cybe R. Wizard" Cybe_R_Wizard@WizardsTower wrote in message
news:20031106105919.3555701c.Cybe_R_Wizard@Wizards Tower...
On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 09:49:03 -0500
"BenignVanilla" wrote:

On the other hand, if M$ gets their way with digital rights
management they'll be able to log into your machine and erase files,
legally, and without any recourse by you. And then they can complete
their monopoly by preventing any other software not written by them
to read any files generated by any of their products. I'd much
rather try Sam's stuff.
snip

That just sounds like typical anti-MS paranoia.

BV.

Not at all, read up on the digital rights management system. It's
really scary if you imagine the uses to which it can be put.
Have you read your Microsoft EULA?
snip

The day MS prevents any software from reading/writing to the PC, their OS
will cease to exist in the market. I agree that their tactics to date have
been less then desireable, but I can't see any value in them doing what you
are saying.

BV.

Basically I don't have the time to learn the ins and outs. I spent hours
just trying to find the right app to change the default of boot up in LILO
(ended up going to a console app, grepping for Windows, using VI to edit the
..cfg file I found, then found a GUI app to effect changes in the .cfg file -
it was ugly). Because Linux is open software (which was an absolutely
wonderful thing with command line Unix) there are so many half baked GUI
apps loaded with the system that it is almost impossible to find the "right"
ones to use and more often than not the ones I try fail. There are at least
4 different GUI systems on the Linux that I installed on my machine and I
have yet to figure out the difference between them all.

I keep sticking my nose in the door to check things out because unix is
still the most powerful OS for manipulating files and data but until things
are more user friendly or I have the time to invest to learn from the bottom
up I will stick to Windows (the KMart product that made computer uses for
the masses possible).

DK


"Cybe R. Wizard" Cybe_R_Wizard@WizardsTower wrote in message
news:20031105195553.0f87fa7b.Cybe_R_Wizard@Wizards Tower...
On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 14:42:09 -0500
"D Kat" wrote:

I love Unix and have since 1970. Linux isn't there yet (NeXT was! and
was 10 years ahead of its time). DK

?!? Shocking statement! Where is it that you think Linux is lacking in
regard to Unix?

Cybe R. Wizard
--
Unofficial "Wizard of Odds," A.H.P.
Original PORG "Water Wizard," R.P.
"Wize(ned) Wizard," A.P.F-P-Y.
Barely Tolerated Wizard, A.J.L & A.A.L

I'm not quite sure how to get this across to you. I am computer literate
compared to 90% of computer users and I really, really like Unix. The OS I
learned on was Unix, I program in C/C++. I was at Bell Labs when Unix/C
were beginning. However, I have limited free time to invest in much of
anything and I probably have more than many people. I'm not brilliant but I
am, it turns out, a tad smarter in this domain than a great many people. If
I'm not able to manage this OS, how can you possibly expect most naive
computer users to use it? It is great that you are successfully using
Linux. Many people are. No one is bad mouthing Linux. We are just saying
it isn't ready yet for the average user.

DKat

"Bob" wrote in message
...
Yes it is bad that you might have to read a little and learn something to
learn
about
using Linux. I use it for about 90 percent of my work now including my
electronics
design and schematic programs at work and had never seen it until I went
to
work
for the company I work for now 3 years ago. I did have to spend some time
reading
and learning but hey made me a little smarter. The latest releases are
almost
self
installing almost as easy as windows and stability is fantastic. I also
use
linux based
IPCop firewall for both the Knology connection at work and the dial up at
home
and
with dial on demand I have three systems networked into it so all machines
can
be
online at the same time. The best way is to set up an old computer and
get a
copy
of RedHat and start playing with it you might surprise yourself and like
it.
Course
still haven't figured out what this has to do with ponding!

Bob


BenignVanilla wrote:

"Chad" wrote in message ...
Linux is not ready for prime time as a desktop OS. Clearly.

I have been using linux for 7 years now.... for over two as my only OS
at home. I love the gnome x-windows environment, all my favorite
windows apps/functionality for free. Last year, had linux hooked up
in
my car running my mp3's, gps and dvd's while I was one the road. It
is
much more stable that windows ever was. I had my home pc up for over
400 days without reboot... until my daughter pulled the plug. I never
get infected by stupid windows viruses. I have much beter security.
Why, even right now I am securely running a remote desktop in which I
am
posting this message in. It still has the speed as if I was sitting
at
my desktop. By the way, my wife could be using it at home right now
too, since you can have as many different desktops running as your
hardware will support. I will admit that when I switched to linux you
needed to know some linux, but my recent experience with RedHat & SUSE
running both Gnome and KDE make me believe that it is ready.

...my non-techy wife uses my linux desktop more than her
crash-every-day
windows desktop... It is getting to the point where I have to kick her
off my computer so I can use it...

Severel people have responded to my post, and all have talked about how
Linux is free and much more stable. I do not argue against that at all.
I am
an IT professional. I understand the stability of the unix kernels. I
get
it. My point is simply that the MS OS with bugs and all is easier for
the
common (wo)man to manage in a day to day environment.

As for security and MS virus', I speculate that if Linux was on 90% of
the
workstations in the world, we'd be reading about more Linux virus'. I
agree
that MS has been lax in it's security and vulnerability protection, but
surely the number of machines running the OS make it a good statistical
target. Why attack a small number of computer savvy people if I can
attack a
larger group not so savvy users?

BV.

The fact that all Unix base systems have the administrator login as "ROOT"
makes it ideal for a hacker. You already know the login... just have to
make a program to generate passwords.

"Cybe R. Wizard" Cybe_R_Wizard@WizardsTower wrote in message
news:20031106103352.3e978bb0.Cybe_R_Wizard@Wizards Tower...
On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 09:54:39 -0500
"BenignVanilla" wrote:

As for security and MS virus', I speculate that if Linux was on 90% of
the workstations in the world, we'd be reading about more Linux
virus'. I agree that MS has been lax in it's security and
vulnerability protection, but surely the number of machines running
the OS make it a good statistical target. Why attack a small number of
computer savvy people if I can attack a larger group not so savvy
users?

BV.

Because one would have to logged in as root (/) which is the number one
no-no in the Linux world, just as in the Unix world. Otherwise a
cracker would need your root password which is fairly well protected.
As an IT professional I'm surprised you even asked. Unless, of course,
your IT career is mostly using Microsoft products? Not that this is a
bad thing. A whole lot of the internet would disappear if Microsoft
products suddenly did likewise.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
Unofficial "Wizard of Odds," A.H.P.
Original PORG "Water Wizard," R.P.
"Wize(ned) Wizard," A.P.F-P-Y.
Barely Tolerated Wizard, A.J.L & A.A.L

BenignVanilla wrote:

On the other hand, if M$ gets their way with digital rights management
they'll be able to log into your machine and erase files, legally, and
without any recourse by you. And then they can complete their monopoly
by preventing any other software not written by them to read any files
generated by any of their products. I'd much rather try Sam's stuff.

snip

That just sounds like typical anti-MS paranoia.

This isn't black helicopters. Google "palladium tcpa". Palladium
includes hardware and software that controls who can use any data on
your machine (Longhorn and office 2003 are starting to use it). MS, and
others, have tried to make legislation that requires any device that
contains IP to contain palladium hardware (Not sure where that is now,
and I hope it failed, but this is obviously what MS wants done). This
hardware allows commands from the originator of the IP to erase files
from your machine and control other things.

So, if you post messages to rec.ponds using IE, then MS could enforce
that I only read your messages using IE. Note that MS can inforce this;
I could understand if the creator of the message wanted to control who
reads their info (well, not in this case but in general) but why should
MS be able to control it? Since most people reading rec.ponds use IE
than I'd have to buy windows and IE to read rec.ponds. This is what I
mean by completing the monopoly.

Anyway, this whole thing is way beyond just MS, is very complicated, and
worth looking at.

Here's some info that goes into more detail:
info on palladium: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html

info on how office 2003 is starting to use it:
http://www.silicon.com/software/os/0...0005843,00.htm

"D Kat" writes:
unix is still the most powerful OS for manipulating files and data
but until things are more user friendly or I have the time to invest
to learn from the bottom up I will stick to Windows

A good compromise is to use cygwin (www.cygwin.com).

lots of packages, including Xwindows.

(grasping for OB rec.pond - Anyone use mysql or postgres under linux
to track pond data?

--
be safe.
flip

UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things,
because that would also stop you from doing clever things.
- Doug Gwyn

I can't believe I'm actually answering here... but, see "Unix Haters
Handbook" for discussions about unix safety.

FWIW BV, you're wording about 95 % of what I believe to be true, but then
again I only have 17 years IT experience, and have tried Red Hat, SuSe et
all, only to be utterly disappointed (and YES, I did want it to work, and NO
you Linux groupies are not smarter than I am ;-) )

Linux has it's merits, but so do Pseudomonas.

Whirrrrr... ;-)

Back to ponds for me.

Theo

excuse me, but most of my friends cannot configure drivers to work with windows and
heaven help them if they get a new puter cause most of the software they been using
is out of date and wont work with each upgrade. I am talking people with old
printers and old label software that is exactly what they need and had to dump it and
buy new to work, older small business software that is no longer functional. some of
those older programs, older printers were much much better and didnt break down, the
software was soooo much easier to use. several friends are tearing their hair out.
I tell em to just have XP wiped off the puter and go back to win 98 so they can use
their older equipment and software.
If every computer out there shipped with linux, there wouldnt be any market for
windows. And Mac people are fanatics about their OS.
I keep swearing I am going to switch, and this next puter I build is going to be the
one cause win98 will not work with more than 526 ram and I am not going to spyware
XP. Ingrid

"BenignVanilla" wrote:
1) Your nick implies you have some computer knowledge, so I am not surprised
you are able to run Linux without an issue. What about the regular Joe
Schmoe's? Can they find and configure drivers easily on a Linux box like
they can on an MS box? I doubt it.

2) If Linux is so superior why are we all not using? Because is is only
superiour in some ways, and right now those ways do not out weigh the pro's
of windows.

BV.




~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

"D Kat" wrote in message
et...
The fact that all Unix base systems have the administrator login as "ROOT"
makes it ideal for a hacker. You already know the login... just have to
make a program to generate passwords.


And in windows NT/2000/etc you login as Administrator, in the Cisco world
your goal is enable access. Knowing the goal and reaching it are two
different things.

Everyone knows where Mount Everest is, you just have to walk straight up to
place your flag there....

Sameer

And Mac people are fanatics about their OS.

You know... Mac OS X is Unix based... its very popular and is in the
public's hands-- for 3 years now. All these artsy fartsy desingers are
really using unix... and I wouldn't really call them techy. Many just
know how to use the design programs vs. knowing how to configure any
type of computer(PC, Mac, AS400, Mainframe) They made or are making
the change. hmmm... I cant believe this wasn't brought up in this
thread. Probably, because like most, I used to think Mac was a 4 letter
word.

I actually run a lot of my own programs (doing speech, data collection and
data analysis) and use many berkeley Unix DOS utilities in DOS . Windows
Excel has served as a nice replacement for many Unix command line programs
that DOS never was able to do. I was never able to beat Unix into doing the
RealTime processes that I had to be able to do (I have to play auditory
files one sample point at a time).

I went to the BSD site after you mentioned it and I'm now trying to figure
out how to incorporate it into our lab. The Berkeley Dos Unix utilities are
nice but they just don't quite cut it. At this point I find that each OS has
something to offer that the others don't (though I am now running real time
data collection in WinNT with a windows app I was able to put together with
BuilderCPP and CDX - In which case Windows is the only OS that will do
everything I need - I just feel loyal to Unix) DK

"Offbreed" wrote in message
om...
"D Kat" wrote in message
...
I love Unix and have since 1970. Linux isn't there yet (NeXT was! and
was
10 years ahead of its time). DK

Have you checked the *BSD branch of UNIX yet?

D Kat wrote:
Basically I don't have the time to learn the ins and outs. I spent hours
just trying to find the right app to change the default of boot up in LILO
(ended up going to a console app, grepping for Windows, using VI to edit the
.cfg file I found, then found a GUI app to effect changes in the .cfg file -
it was ugly). Because Linux is open software (which was an absolutely
wonderful thing with command line Unix) there are so many half baked GUI
apps loaded with the system that it is almost impossible to find the "right"
ones to use and more often than not the ones I try fail. There are at least
4 different GUI systems on the Linux that I installed on my machine and I
have yet to figure out the difference between them all.

I keep sticking my nose in the door to check things out because unix is
still the most powerful OS for manipulating files and data but until things
are more user friendly or I have the time to invest to learn from the bottom
up I will stick to Windows (the KMart product that made computer uses for
the masses possible).

Have you tried Slackware Linux? It is often referred to as the most "Unix"
of the Linux distributions. It also relies mostly on the command line (ie
editors and simple config scripts) to edit configuration files instead of
GUIs. It tends to be lean when it comes to programs included, although it
does offer many choices of XWindows managers. Many people also say it is
more stable than other distributions, probably due to the fact it doesn't
include those "half baked GUI apps". Pat tends to stick to stable software
to include in the distro. Check it out if you have the time,
www.slackware.com, sounds like it might be up your alley.

I've been using Slackware 8.x as my primary desktop for the last 2 years.
I have no problems doing most tasks except a few games, and that's just
because I haven't taken the time to install something like WineX for
gaming. I just keep around a Windows box for gaming. I also do my
presentations with PowerPoint, but that's just because again, I've been
too lazy to install OpenOffice and also it's easier for my research
advisor if I use the same version of PowerPoint as he does for all those
"could you make some slides for blah project?" incidents. Overall, I
spend about 80% of my time in Linux (more like 95% if you discount the
gaming time).

Cybe R. Wizard Cybe_R_Wizard@wizardstower wrote:
On the gripping hand, those who learn Linux first learn just as fast as
Windows users and will not even consider switching to such inferior
OSs as any of the Microsoft offerings, each new iteration of which has
its own learning curve.

Ooo.. gripping hand... I sense a Niven and Pournelle reader in our midst

BenignVanilla wrote:

Severel people have responded to my post, and all have talked about how
Linux is free and much more stable. I do not argue against that at all. I am
an IT professional. I understand the stability of the unix kernels. I get
it. My point is simply that the MS OS with bugs and all is easier for the
common (wo)man to manage in a day to day environment.

Easier to manage? Bwhahahaha... *gasps for breath* oh man, you need to
spend a month in my old job... let's see... typical day... 50% dealing
with how the web developers (all on Windows machines) had messed up their
machines or servers that day (or the virus of the day/week), 10% trying to
convince the boss he really should let me apply these critical patches to
the system, 10% cleaning out the Cisco router half-open cache because xyz
Windows user fuzbarred it up trying to listen to a net radio, 25% reading
the security mailing lists to compile the list of patches to present to
the boss (again), and maybe 5% checking in on the Linux boxes and making
sure they were all a-okay. Every time I got paged at home for a server
issue, it was the Windows boxes or the latest virus/worm making the
rounds. Oh yeah, and the Linux box I had that would automate my "the
machine is down" pages never itself went down unless the power failed long
enough that the UPS went down.

Even now at my university... I spend hours a week applying patches to the
Windows box I keep on campus. Click on pretty executable, click some more
through a EULA and rather unneccessary dialog boxes, reboot, repeat ad
naseum. Compared to my Linux box... upgradepkg package then
/etc/rc.d/rc.package restart or kill -HUP process_id.... taking all of
about 5 minutes (not counting the time to download the packages). Only
time I have to reboot is when I upgrade/update the kernel itself.

As for security and MS virus', I speculate that if Linux was on 90% of the
workstations in the world, we'd be reading about more Linux virus'. I agree
that MS has been lax in it's security and vulnerability protection, but
surely the number of machines running the OS make it a good statistical
target. Why attack a small number of computer savvy people if I can attack a
larger group not so savvy users?

People have been saying that, but really, would it be true? What is the
issue on Windows boxes? Mostly that people don't apply the patches.
Probably because the patches have a tendancy to be rather, well, unstable.
My poor home Windows box constantly crashes during my favorite game once I
put on all the latest security patches. It was fine before. I put up with
it because I prefer a patched Windows box that crashes occasionally to one
that is unpatched and gets hit with the latest virus of the week. Most
regular users would get fed up with the crashing and either reinstall to
the CD version (unpatched) or remove the patch. Also, finding the patches
can sometimes be very difficult, especially if the machine does not have
access to Windows Update at that time. It took me several days to finally
find the TechNet search engine that will return all critical patches for a
Microsoft product. Now, imagine a non-techie trying that... hah. Anyways,
it leaves a lot of unpatched systems running out there.

Now, compare this to Linux. With my distro of choice, the updated packages
rarely cause stability problems and if they do, the maintainer usually has
an updated and fixed version of the package that remedies the stability
problem in a day or two. Many Linux distros also come with tools that
allow the user to get and install the most recent packages from their
preferred FTP sites with a simple command. My distro of choice also puts
all their patches in one subdirectory of the release (ie 9.0/patches) on
their FTP site with a ChangeFile that explains what each patch is and why
it is there. These sort of tools make it much easier for an automatic
method to be added that would go out, grab patches and apply them without
the user having to lift a finger. This would protect the non-saavy user,
while the saavy user could have the option to disable this automatic
feature and do it manually if he/she so desires.

There is also the issue of the initial security of the system, ie what
services does the machine make available to the world by default. In this
realm, Windows is really bad. For example, I cannot disable RPC on my
Win2k machine without disabling very important features on my desktop,
like the right click pop Properties box. Yet RPC is not a good service to
have out there available on the Internet. There are many issues with it.
While I have not seen Windows make much of a response to this issue, I
have noticed that almost every single recent Linux distribution has been
turning off many Internet available services by default. This is a good
thing. Personally, I think a workstation should start with no ports open
to the world and the user should only turn things like web servers and SSH
on if/when they need them.