Well unfortuantely the Constitution has been rendered nearly useless except where it suits the government. Latest example is how in some states you car is impounded if you are arrested of driving under the influence, if you are found innocent, too bad, they still keep your car. As any scholar can tell you, this is exactly what the Constitution sought to prohibit, the government should not have the power to arbitrarily take property. Oh and don't even get me started on how this relates to the second ammendent:)
You have no freedom (my response to a certain Sun executive's comment on privacy).
I find it exceedingly hard to believe that a company which develops operating systems does not know who Theo de Raadt is. I cannot even venture a guess as to why they made the decision to threaten legal action against him and do NOT mean to imply it is for competitive purposes.
What infuriates me about this situation is that a company which from what I can gather is marketing an inferior product and is destined to go out of business in the near future is threatening a man who gave so much to the community. Although many people have personal grievances with Theo, few would disagree that his hard line attitude on security has benefitted both linux and the BSD's. And he is being sued by some third rate company that few have even heard of? Because their suits decided to file trademark papers, I'm sorry but this just represents all that has gone wrong over the past few years with what used to be OUR Internet.
I will refrain from bashing of the original poster, it's not his fault, if he doesn't even know who the Theo involved is...
Come on people, try to at least read the article before asking stupid questions. They are going to justify SQL Server as better based upon price. MS is not stupid, they write shitty operating systems but they aren't stupid.
At that time, Tong predicted, "Larry's multimillion-dollar computer will beat our $50,000 one by two-tenths of a second, because it's his test. It's likely that the cost of the Oracle database software alone will be more than the whole thing for Microsoft, including SQL Server, consulting, software, and hardware."
My FIC VA-503+ does it quite nicely. btw anyone recall the story behind the El Torito name? There is a chain of mexican restaurants by that name in Southern California (possibly elsewhere).
Ok, I feel rather compelled to reply based upon the problem solver remark.... Reading the source is obviously done after the manuals have been perused, it is the way that one fully understands what the program is doing. There are certainly things that the source will reveal that the manual does not.
Since you bring up secure shell (the fact that you refer to it as sshd speaks volumes), an understanding of the fundamentals of cryptography when combined with a source file will show you most of what the security concious admin needs to know. A manual certainly cannot be trusted for this information, if the programmer half assed the random number generator, why would he document it?
Personally I would recommend 'The Design and Implementation of the 4.4 BSD Operating System' combined with the books of W. Richard Stevens but that's a little much to expect from an (usually) underpaid sys admin.
No, remember what you are doing when you program, you are giving a series of instructions. For convenience those instructions are written in a human readable format then later translated to a machine readable format. The actual intent of the instruction has not changed, just the representation. The trojan lies in the instruction you gave the original program (in this case gcc). When you use Sun's compiler to compile gcc, the instruction does not change, only its form (to the purists, this is an abstract view of an instruction, I don't want to hear opcodes mentioned:). Thus the trojan is still present. In fact I would argue that this problem cannot be feasibly solved but merely represents a risk in trusting any person/entity.
Slashdot Mirror
Well unfortuantely the Constitution has been rendered nearly useless except where it suits the government. Latest example is how in some states you car is impounded if you are arrested of driving under the influence, if you are found innocent, too bad, they still keep your car. As any scholar can tell you, this is exactly what the Constitution sought to prohibit, the government should not have the power to arbitrarily take property. Oh and don't even get me started on how this relates to the second ammendent :)
You have no freedom (my response to a certain Sun executive's comment on privacy).
I find it exceedingly hard to believe that a company which develops operating systems does not know who Theo de Raadt is. I cannot even venture a guess as to why they made the decision to threaten legal action against him and do NOT mean to imply it is for competitive purposes.
...
What infuriates me about this situation is that a company which from what I can gather is marketing an inferior product and is destined to go out of business in the near future is threatening a man who gave so much to the community. Although many people have personal grievances with Theo, few would disagree that his hard line attitude on security has benefitted both linux and the BSD's. And he is being sued by some third rate company that few have even heard of? Because their suits decided to file trademark papers, I'm sorry but this just represents all that has gone wrong over the past few years with what used to be OUR Internet.
I will refrain from bashing of the original poster, it's not his fault, if he doesn't even know who the Theo involved is
Come on people, try to at least read the article before asking stupid questions. They are going to justify SQL Server as better based upon price. MS is not stupid, they write shitty operating systems but they aren't stupid.
At that time, Tong predicted, "Larry's multimillion-dollar computer will beat our $50,000 one by two-tenths of a second, because it's his test. It's likely that the cost of
the Oracle database software alone will be more than the whole thing for Microsoft, including SQL Server, consulting, software, and hardware."
My FIC VA-503+ does it quite nicely.
btw anyone recall the story behind the El Torito name? There is a chain of mexican restaurants by that name in Southern California (possibly elsewhere).
Ok, I feel rather compelled to reply based upon the problem solver remark....
Reading the source is obviously done after the manuals have been perused, it is the way that one fully understands what the program is doing. There are certainly things that the source will reveal that the manual does not.
Since you bring up secure shell (the fact that you refer to it as sshd speaks volumes), an understanding of the fundamentals of cryptography when combined with a source file will show you most of what the security concious admin needs to know. A manual certainly cannot be trusted for this information, if the programmer half assed the random number generator, why would he document it?
Personally I would recommend 'The Design and Implementation of the 4.4 BSD Operating System' combined with the books of W. Richard Stevens but that's a little much to expect from an (usually) underpaid sys admin.
Oligopoly is a valid word, thus defeating any spell checker. Unfortunately there is not yet (nor will there ever likely be) a context/meaning checker.
No, remember what you are doing when you program, you are giving a series of instructions. For convenience those instructions are written in a human readable format then later translated to a machine readable format. The actual intent of the instruction has not changed, just the representation. The trojan lies in the instruction you gave the original program (in this case gcc). When you use Sun's compiler to compile gcc, the instruction does not change, only its form (to the purists, this is an abstract view of an instruction, I don't want to hear opcodes mentioned :). Thus the trojan is still present.
In fact I would argue that this problem cannot be feasibly solved but merely represents a risk in trusting any person/entity.