IIS and Windows Server are a joke.
The problem being observed is that system administrators don't know what they are doing. If you stop the attacker from gaining shell access, in the first place, they can't run their rootkit! DISABLE ROOT SSH LOGINS AND PASSWORD BASED SSH AUTHENTICATION!!! Also, in case it isn't already painfully obvious, SELinux is there to protect you from exactly this kind of exploit. The Linux community needs to STOP TELLING PEOPLE TO SHUT IT OFF just because they don't understand how to use it.
This takes hypocrisy to a whole new level. When Microsoft is split up like AT&T and Standard Oil then(and only then) will they have a right to complain about monopoly abuse.
If IPv6 does not support NAT I will not use it unless I have absolutely no choice. NAT is a wonderful security enhancement. There's no reason that a desktop should have a globally routable IP address. For heaven's sake, even when they have routable addresses everyone blocks access to them with a firewall. Desktops are not intended to be servers and they should never be reachable from the outside world under any conditions.
Install Shorewall controlling the firewall. Shorewall is far easier to use than raw IP Tables or Cisco ACL's. The whole delete the list and start over part is a real turn off and the syntax is completely stupid. For routing protocols install Quagga.
At any rate, if you don't like rolling a Linux router yourself you can always try Vyatta.
Screw IOS, its resistance to simple scripting, and its defiance to be committed easily to memory. The IOS can only be scripted through a recorded telnet session, which is to say not at tall. The command line is counter intuitive and the commands are difficult to remember.
Personally, I used Linux based routers at work. They are dirt cheap, they perform extremely well, they never crash(except when the cleaning lady unplugs them... But that's another story), and they are infinitely more flexible than a Cisco router.
You're overlooking the fact that Microsoft is a monopoly. Very few people actually evaluate the value of Windows, OSX, Linux, and make an informed decision. These tens of millions of people you refer to purchased Microsoft not because they believed it to be the best tool available but because it came on the computer and because lots of other people are using it, so it must be the best right(Lemming effect). Windows isn't dominant because it's the best choice, it's dominant because it's the only "choice" supported by the manufacturer.
You can actually do remote assistance invitations on Windows, or install VNC on her computer.. I'm no lover of Microsoft, but that's kind of a poor reason to choose Linux over Windows? Remote assistance, VNC, RDP... They are all the same. They inherently transfer more data across the internet than ssh does. I don't know if you've ever used a remote display protocol over the internet but I'm here to tell you that even with the color depth turned all the way down they completely suck. Hell ssh keystrokes lag behind sometimes and you want to transfer the remote computer's graphical display buffer? It's hideously slow and I don't feel like waiting longer just so I can interact with an inferior user interface.
This judge is naive. Any way you look at this there is no way to know who pressed the submit button. In a "best case" scenario the ISP will know who's account posted the blogs but that does not tell you who actually did it. A friend could have used his computer to send them. If the man has an open wi-fi network anyone fron the hospital could have driven by in a car and jacked his internet connection to post the blogs.
This lawsuit is nothing more than a clever way to retaliate against a whistle-blower.
Why don't more Linux-using shops reach out to the Linux-using community? Because the Linux-using community represents such a small percentage of their customer base that it doesn't make financial sense for them to spend the resources to specifically cater to it. That's not entirely correct. Speaking as a Linux user(desktop and server) I am sorry to say that the thing holding Linux back is the Linux community itself. The Linux community has, by and large, taken the position that any company which releases something for Linux, which is not open source, is an evil and should be boycotted. I work in the computer game industry and I actively try to support the idea of cross-platform games. However, I've been told by many people in the Linux community that if the game is not shipped with the source code that they will not buy it. This is an extremely stupid mentality. Games for Linux are one of the last things binding people to Microsoft. If you don't reward companies that make an effort to support Linux games there won't be any support for Linux games at all. For crying out loud, just look at how many people say they have Vista just because there game doesn't run anywhere else? If the Linux desktop is to succeed the Linux community must get used to the idea that there will be closed source applications written for it. Get real, the Linux Desktop is a very small market share right now. No major vendor is going to GPL their source code JUST to support Linux(especially not for a game).
Why don't company's support Linux? When the Linux community is dominated by "My way or the highway" attitudes corporations invariably choose the highway because the Linux desktop is a small market share and can be plainly ignored. Good God people, we don't need Microsoft to sink the Linux desktop. The Linux community is doing a good enough job already.
That didn't stop Microsoft from suing Lindows.... For the record, Microsoft won. If "Office Open" doesn't infringe on "Open Office" I don't know what does...
This is not about Microsoft's monopolistic games nor is it about ODF vs OOXML. If Microsoft used open document formats it would not be very long before Microsoft was forced to reduce the price of Microsoft Office. Come on people, Microsoft Office is a decent program but it not worth the $380-680 that Microsoft charges for it. For Microsoft, ODF vs OOXML is about money and nothing else.
Microsoft Office generates more than 6 billion dollars a year in revenues and Microsoft will do absolutely anything to protect it. Does anyone really believe that referencing patented material is necessary or even accidental? Microsoft knows that OOXML is not a standard but they also know that they have a pretty good shot at ramming this down ISO's throat. If they succeed, they will have simultaneously crippled their competition and the ISO. The resulting confusion will ensure the safety of Microsoft Office for another few years. It's actually rather ingenious in an insidious sort of way...
There are no technical flaws in OOXML. The "standard" is exactly the way Microsoft executives want it. Open enough to bully their way through ISO and closed enough that compatible competitive software cannot be created without reverse engineering patented material...
P.S. Kudos to India!!! Baton down the hatches because Microsoft is going to bring down as much political pressure on you as they possibly can, if they haven't already.
Yes linux will be adopted just for the sole reason "it's free." However it will never compete with a desktop or A/D. 1) A/D sucks... Why you windows people think it makes sense to lock stuff down on the client side of things I'll never know... Security should always be maintained on the server. And don't give me some crap about how A/D is controlled by the server because it's enforced by the client. 2) That's not even true. I use Linux on my desktop at home and at work and, in addition to being free of viruses, it can do a lot of things that Microsoft simply cannot do. Add to that that Samba 4 will include A/D support. The Samba group already has a development prototype.
If I had to guess, I think "non-commercial" means that executives cannot decide to use the Google Pack company wide as the company's default office suite, while individual employees would be permitted to use it of their own volition.
Did I miss something? I allways thoght that StarOffice is a commertial product - One you actualy pay for - $69.95 U.S to be precise. Yes, that's it exactly. StarOffice is a commercial application. Google's terms of use prohibit the use of StarOffice in a commercial setting. It is only freely available for personal use.
You didn't listen to anything I said. OpenOffice can't render certain aspects of Microsoft's document formats because Microsoft insists on using closed standards. You're attributing flaws to OpenOffice because of ambiguities that Microsoft spent millions of dollars engineering!!!
We see the same with browsers - there are some XHTML or CSS3 features browsers can't render, but it's open... So? The difference is that the web browsers will eventually implement the new web standards while Microsoft intendeds to maintain incompatibility with other Office Suites indefinitely and at all costs.
Slashdot Mirror
Now that the ISO has "taken control" I wish you the best of luck trying to get Microsoft to comply with any changes you make to the standard...
IIS and Windows Server are a joke. The problem being observed is that system administrators don't know what they are doing. If you stop the attacker from gaining shell access, in the first place, they can't run their rootkit! DISABLE ROOT SSH LOGINS AND PASSWORD BASED SSH AUTHENTICATION!!! Also, in case it isn't already painfully obvious, SELinux is there to protect you from exactly this kind of exploit. The Linux community needs to STOP TELLING PEOPLE TO SHUT IT OFF just because they don't understand how to use it.
Those "professors" would be looking for jobs.
It's easier to find things on Wikipedia with Google than it is with the Wikipedia search... Good luck, Jimmy Wales. You're going to need it.
This takes hypocrisy to a whole new level. When Microsoft is split up like AT&T and Standard Oil then(and only then) will they have a right to complain about monopoly abuse.
If IPv6 does not support NAT I will not use it unless I have absolutely no choice. NAT is a wonderful security enhancement. There's no reason that a desktop should have a globally routable IP address. For heaven's sake, even when they have routable addresses everyone blocks access to them with a firewall. Desktops are not intended to be servers and they should never be reachable from the outside world under any conditions.
Which brings us back to Cisco routers not being as flexible as a Linux based router.
So... This is event driven how exactly?
Install Shorewall controlling the firewall. Shorewall is far easier to use than raw IP Tables or Cisco ACL's. The whole delete the list and start over part is a real turn off and the syntax is completely stupid. For routing protocols install Quagga. At any rate, if you don't like rolling a Linux router yourself you can always try Vyatta.
I use Linux Servers and Linux desktops. Screw Microsoft I need them for absolutely nothing.
Personally, I used Linux based routers at work. They are dirt cheap, they perform extremely well, they never crash(except when the cleaning lady unplugs them... But that's another story), and they are infinitely more flexible than a Cisco router.
LMAO I was about to say that.
You're overlooking the fact that Microsoft is a monopoly. Very few people actually evaluate the value of Windows, OSX, Linux, and make an informed decision. These tens of millions of people you refer to purchased Microsoft not because they believed it to be the best tool available but because it came on the computer and because lots of other people are using it, so it must be the best right(Lemming effect). Windows isn't dominant because it's the best choice, it's dominant because it's the only "choice" supported by the manufacturer.
This judge is naive. Any way you look at this there is no way to know who pressed the submit button. In a "best case" scenario the ISP will know who's account posted the blogs but that does not tell you who actually did it. A friend could have used his computer to send them. If the man has an open wi-fi network anyone fron the hospital could have driven by in a car and jacked his internet connection to post the blogs.
This lawsuit is nothing more than a clever way to retaliate against a whistle-blower.
Why don't company's support Linux? When the Linux community is dominated by "My way or the highway" attitudes corporations invariably choose the highway because the Linux desktop is a small market share and can be plainly ignored. Good God people, we don't need Microsoft to sink the Linux desktop. The Linux community is doing a good enough job already.
That didn't stop Microsoft from suing Lindows.... For the record, Microsoft won. If "Office Open" doesn't infringe on "Open Office" I don't know what does...
This is not about Microsoft's monopolistic games nor is it about ODF vs OOXML. If Microsoft used open document formats it would not be very long before Microsoft was forced to reduce the price of Microsoft Office. Come on people, Microsoft Office is a decent program but it not worth the $380-680 that Microsoft charges for it. For Microsoft, ODF vs OOXML is about money and nothing else.
Microsoft Office generates more than 6 billion dollars a year in revenues and Microsoft will do absolutely anything to protect it. Does anyone really believe that referencing patented material is necessary or even accidental? Microsoft knows that OOXML is not a standard but they also know that they have a pretty good shot at ramming this down ISO's throat. If they succeed, they will have simultaneously crippled their competition and the ISO. The resulting confusion will ensure the safety of Microsoft Office for another few years. It's actually rather ingenious in an insidious sort of way...
There are no technical flaws in OOXML. The "standard" is exactly the way Microsoft executives want it. Open enough to bully their way through ISO and closed enough that compatible competitive software cannot be created without reverse engineering patented material...
P.S. Kudos to India!!! Baton down the hatches because Microsoft is going to bring down as much political pressure on you as they possibly can, if they haven't already.
2) That's not even true. I use Linux on my desktop at home and at work and, in addition to being free of viruses, it can do a lot of things that Microsoft simply cannot do. Add to that that Samba 4 will include A/D support. The Samba group already has a development prototype.
If I had to guess, I think "non-commercial" means that executives cannot decide to use the Google Pack company wide as the company's default office suite, while individual employees would be permitted to use it of their own volition.
Why isn't that engouh? Microsoft succeeded in forcing Lindows to change it's name for exactly those reasons.
They are not the best because Microsoft is a monopoly and monopolies do not compete because they do not have to....
I will start respecting Microsoft when they discontinue their abusive monopolistic business practices and not before.