Last time I checked, XP included only minimal drivers for the Nvidia and ATI cards too.. I'm fairly certain I had to go download the 3d drivers separately when I last installed Windows on a machine.
or the even more simple step of switching off the 'hide extensions for known filetypes' option, and not running executable attachments from untrusted sources, IE; p2p, irc, email, and dodgy websites advertised by banner ads, irc, spam, or spim! (INCLUDING email that claims to be from Microsoft, reputable AV firms, or your own ISP!)
In fact, if you follow just that one piece of advice you totally eliminate a good number of Windows inherent insecurity problems.
I recently converted a 'SOHO' user to RedHat, after he was having endless frustrations with XP. I suspect a lot of it was spyware related; I got handed him as a 'problem client' that someone else wanted to be rid of:)
On reflection; I think the problem is more a matter of scale, and ease of (mis)use.
If you told enough people to drain the oil from their cars, with a plausable reason for doing it, perhaps a number of them would. Expecially if it was as easy as removing a file from/windows/system32.
The same applies to telling everyone they know.
Computers make lots of tasks easy; they don't differentiate between intelligent, productive tasks and pointless or destructive actions.
The problem is no longer with the Operating System itself. The problem is that most users care far too little about how the operating system works, and are much too trusting.
Say, for example, that you came back to your car one day, and there was the following note on the windshield.
"Helpful advice from another motorist; your engine has become clogged with a black, sticky residue which may be slowing it down. You can remove a plug from the bottom of the motor and drain this gooey stuff out, and your car will run so much better. Pass this advice on to everyone you know"
Most people would know enough about their car to recognise that this is not good advice, yet they will happily install 'updates', submit banking details to suspicious websites, or delete arbritrary files out of/windows/system32 with barely a thought.
I'm curious about Spaf's comment that the prevalence of worms on Windows is due to architectural differences rather than market share. Is there proof of this? Certainly people write worms/virii for Windows because it's easier, but also because it's so much easier to hit critical mass.
A year ago, I would have agreed with this point of view. Internet Explorer, Outlook Express, IIS, and Windows itself were crawling with major security issues that different worms and viruses could exploit.
Now days, viruses are starting to arrive as a zipped, passworded attachment, replying entirely on social engineering tricks to fool the user into running the virus.
If Linux were the predominant desktop operating system, I think these viruses would still be arriving, as gpg-encrypted rpm's or tarballs, and the same users would still be fooled into installing them with root priviledges.
I try to avoid running the same services on both machines, for exactly that reason. SSH is my biggest concern, but even then the only vulnerabilities I've seen so far require a brute-force attack, and only the FreeBSD machine answers dirctly.
The chances of a skript kiddie or worm breaking both machines is exceptionally remote.
The chances of a skilled hacker or 'three-letter-agency' being interested in my web design and feeble sysadmin scripts is equally remote.
Clueful people don't run AV software. Clueful people (even if they use Windows for a desktop) keep important files backed up on a different server, running a different OS from their regular desktop.
Most of my files from the Linux machines are backed up on my FreeBSD machine; neither Linux nor FreeBSD are guaranteed secure, but the chances of both machines being vulnerable at the same time is exceptionally remote.
A record number of viruses, and yet I've had no trouble with any viruses on my main machine (FreeBSD), my laptop (Debian) or the family computer (Redhat).
Back when I was at high-school, we had a 'network'; 16 weird-ass brand computers, connected by 1200 baud RS232 to a Z-80-based 10m 'fileserver'
There was also a network printer; it even beeped if you sent it a ^G.
So one afternoon, we carefully crafted up a file full of ^G's and pagefeeds (^L), queue'd the file about a hundred times while the printer was turned off, and went to our next class. Since the network didn't have any kind of 'queue management', nobody had any idea what the problem was and after chewing through about half a box of paper, the printer got sent back to the shop for servicing.
Entire previous post inspired by Laurence Lessig (see my sig) and the GNAA. Feel free to reuse my example of "unregulated use" under the Creative Commons Share Alike licence. No attribution required.
I would highly advise you read section IV of the ruling in the MPAA v. 2600 case for more information on "fair use". The term is so heavily misused on Slashdot that it has become meaningless.
Perhaps it's time we started using a new term;
Unregulated use
The original idea of copyright was that the creator of a work could control distribution and public performance. 'Fair use' applies to those situations where part of a work is 'distributed' or 'performed', but in a limited way.
'Unregulated use' covers everything else. Example; Lucasfilm has copyrights on the starwars characters. I can't make copies of the starwars movies, the movie as an entire work is copyright. I can't make my own line of Star Wars products, the characters themselves are copyright. I can review the starwars movies. That's fair use.
However, I am perfectly entitles to shove a greased yoda doll up my ass. The act has nothing whatsoever to do with "public performance" (one would certainly hope!) or "distributing copies"
Fair use relates to things that would have been covered by copyright; derivative works, quoting, etc. They're allowed, even though technically they're a little bit of the 'copying and redistribution' that copyright is supposed to regulate.
Unregulated use relates to things that have nothing to do with "copying", and should never have been covered. Transfering a work 'I own' into another format, playing a DVD on a non-standard platform, etc. If I bought the work, I should have the right to do anything I want short of making copies and giving them to my friends. Playing DVD's under Linux, converting AAC's into MP3's, etc -should- all be unregulated uses. It's none of the copyright-holders business what I do with the disc after I bought it, unless they can PROVE that I'm redistributing unauthorised copies!
I respect "copyright" in the original sense; something about promoting the sciences and useful arts, remember?
I do not respect the disgusting perversion of copyright that greatly restricts new art based on the old (How many of Walt's classic movies are an entirely new storyline and NOT based on fairy tales, legends, or other earlier works? Steamboat Bill Jr, anyone?). Most art, and perhaps all science, builds on what has been done before. To quote Einstein; "If I have seen further than other men, it is only because I have stood on the shoulders of giants"
I do not respect the "Mickey Mouse Protection Act" (Sonny Bono, etc), a 'copyright' extended so far that any work you see created in your lifetime will not enter the public domain until long after you die.
And I do not respect the DMCA, a disgusting perversion of 'copyright' that restricts what has traditionally been 'unregulated' use. Not just fair use, but 'unregulated use' completely unrelated to the act of 'copying' in any traditional sense. Studying and understanding something that I legitimately bought, or even using something that I OWN in unconventional ways.
I know what I believe in. There's no contradiction here.
Congress has the right to grant to authors and inventors exclusive rights to their works or discoveries, to promote the sciences and useful arts.
They don't have any obligation to do so, and if a company is using copyright in a way that is so clearly damaging (as Microsoft is), the most effective remedy congress could impose is this;
"You have abused this right that WE have granted you, so now we are going to revoke it".
Windows and Office become free to anyone that can obtain them through whatever means. What Microsoft subsequently do with the source code is entirely up to them. They might be able to continue making _some_ profit by releasing windows and office as an open-source product and selling support for it, which seems to be a viable business model for most Linux vendors.
Verne has the same problem; he complained about the high 'teller' charges, and the bank told him that he should use the ATM machine. "they have braile on the buttons".
Well, there's a couple of problems with that. Not all (relatively few, apparently!) blind people know braile for a start. Verne doesn't.
And the ATM machine doesn't provide any feedback. They don't speak, and when they beep it's only to draw attention to something on the screen.
There's no indication that the machine accepted the pin number, got the right account, declined a transaction due to insufficient funds, or anything. Need your account balance? forget it!
.. well, still working on, in my 'copious free time'.
My blind friend uses a barcode reader to scan cans and bottles in his cupboards. At the moment, the script looks up the product description from a textfile provided by the local supermarket, but we've found things like "WAT TM SSE" to be less-than-ideal. (it runs under linux, scanner plugs into keyboard plug, script runs on console, greps for barcode and reads the 'description' via festival.)
The next version, his wife will be able to scan the groceries and record a proper description, cooking instructions, etc, as short mp3 files while she unpacks the weekly shopping.
So, no more cat-food or tomato-sauce incidents when he's looking for a can of spagetti for lunch!
Slashdot Mirror
"it's +5 funny because it's true!"
Last time I checked, XP included only minimal drivers for the Nvidia and ATI cards too.. I'm fairly certain I had to go download the 3d drivers separately when I last installed Windows on a machine.
or the even more simple step of switching off the 'hide extensions for known filetypes' option, and not running executable attachments from untrusted sources, IE; p2p, irc, email, and dodgy websites advertised by banner ads, irc, spam, or spim! (INCLUDING email that claims to be from Microsoft, reputable AV firms, or your own ISP!)
In fact, if you follow just that one piece of advice you totally eliminate a good number of Windows inherent insecurity problems.
1) XP (Warez)
2) Firebird
3) Thunderbird
4) OpenOffice
5) AVG Antivirus
6) Ad-aware
7) Spybot S&D
I recently converted a 'SOHO' user to RedHat, after he was having endless frustrations with XP. I suspect a lot of it was spyware related; I got handed him as a 'problem client' that someone else wanted to be rid of
1) RedHat 8 / Ximian Desktop
2) Mozilla
3) Openoffice
4) efax / mgetty+fax
There's been a few minor issues, but so far he is blown away by the reliability and stability of Linux compared to Windows.
Microsoft is really unclear on this;
If you have an OEM install of Windows, it MUST be sold with the machine. You can't sell the bare machine and reinstall WIndows on your new computer.
If you buy a second-hand machine, apparently you don't ever get Windows with it and are supposed to buy a new version.
It looks to me like someone is trying to sell at least one new windows licence every time a second-hand machine gets sold or donated.
On reflection; I think the problem is more a matter of scale, and ease of (mis)use.
/windows/system32.
If you told enough people to drain the oil from their cars, with a plausable reason for doing it, perhaps a number of them would. Expecially if it was as easy as removing a file from
The same applies to telling everyone they know.
Computers make lots of tasks easy; they don't differentiate between intelligent, productive tasks and pointless or destructive actions.
Allow me to respond to myself;
/windows/system32 with barely a thought.
The problem is no longer with the Operating System itself. The problem is that most users care far too little about how the operating system works, and are much too trusting.
Say, for example, that you came back to your car one day, and there was the following note on the windshield.
"Helpful advice from another motorist; your engine has become clogged with a black, sticky residue which may be slowing it down. You can remove a plug from the bottom of the motor and drain this gooey stuff out, and your car will run so much better. Pass this advice on to everyone you know"
Most people would know enough about their car to recognise that this is not good advice, yet they will happily install 'updates', submit banking details to suspicious websites, or delete arbritrary files out of
See what I mean?
I'm curious about Spaf's comment that the prevalence of worms on Windows is due to architectural differences rather than market share. Is there proof of this? Certainly people write worms/virii for Windows because it's easier, but also because it's so much easier to hit critical mass.
A year ago, I would have agreed with this point of view. Internet Explorer, Outlook Express, IIS, and Windows itself were crawling with major security issues that different worms and viruses could exploit.
Now days, viruses are starting to arrive as a zipped, passworded attachment, replying entirely on social engineering tricks to fool the user into running the virus.
If Linux were the predominant desktop operating system, I think these viruses would still be arriving, as gpg-encrypted rpm's or tarballs, and the same users would still be fooled into installing them with root priviledges.
I'd mod you up +1 informative, but I already commented in this thread :)
I try to avoid running the same services on both machines, for exactly that reason. SSH is my biggest concern, but even then the only vulnerabilities I've seen so far require a brute-force attack, and only the FreeBSD machine answers dirctly.
The chances of a skript kiddie or worm breaking both machines is exceptionally remote.
The chances of a skilled hacker or 'three-letter-agency' being interested in my web design and feeble sysadmin scripts is equally remote.
Clueful people don't run AV software. Clueful people (even if they use Windows for a desktop) keep important files backed up on a different server, running a different OS from their regular desktop.
Most of my files from the Linux machines are backed up on my FreeBSD machine; neither Linux nor FreeBSD are guaranteed secure, but the chances of both machines being vulnerable at the same time is exceptionally remote.
A record number of viruses, and yet I've had no trouble with any viruses on my main machine (FreeBSD), my laptop (Debian) or the family computer (Redhat).
Back when I was at high-school, we had a 'network'; 16 weird-ass brand computers, connected by 1200 baud RS232 to a Z-80-based 10m 'fileserver'
There was also a network printer; it even beeped if you sent it a ^G.
So one afternoon, we carefully crafted up a file full of ^G's and pagefeeds (^L), queue'd the file about a hundred times while the printer was turned off, and went to our next class. Since the network didn't have any kind of 'queue management', nobody had any idea what the problem was and after chewing through about half a box of paper, the printer got sent back to the shop for servicing.
Good times..
s/entitles/entitled/
Entire previous post inspired by Laurence Lessig (see my sig) and the GNAA. Feel free to reuse my example of "unregulated use" under the Creative Commons Share Alike licence. No attribution required.
I would highly advise you read section IV of the ruling in the MPAA v. 2600 case for more information on "fair use". The term is so heavily misused on Slashdot that it has become meaningless.
Perhaps it's time we started using a new term;
Unregulated use
The original idea of copyright was that the creator of a work could control distribution and public performance. 'Fair use' applies to those situations where part of a work is 'distributed' or 'performed', but in a limited way.
'Unregulated use' covers everything else. Example; Lucasfilm has copyrights on the starwars characters. I can't make copies of the starwars movies, the movie as an entire work is copyright. I can't make my own line of Star Wars products, the characters themselves are copyright. I can review the starwars movies. That's fair use.
However, I am perfectly entitles to shove a greased yoda doll up my ass. The act has nothing whatsoever to do with "public performance" (one would certainly hope!) or "distributing copies"
That's "unregulated use"
Yes, I admit, I'm greatly inspired by Lessig. I probably should have attributed him (and I should have checked the quote from whoever-it-was too :)
Not 'fair use'; 'unregulated use'
Fair use relates to things that would have been covered by copyright; derivative works, quoting, etc. They're allowed, even though technically they're a little bit of the 'copying and redistribution' that copyright is supposed to regulate.
Unregulated use relates to things that have nothing to do with "copying", and should never have been covered. Transfering a work 'I own' into another format, playing a DVD on a non-standard platform, etc. If I bought the work, I should have the right to do anything I want short of making copies and giving them to my friends. Playing DVD's under Linux, converting AAC's into MP3's, etc -should- all be unregulated uses. It's none of the copyright-holders business what I do with the disc after I bought it, unless they can PROVE that I'm redistributing unauthorised copies!
I respect "copyright" in the original sense; something about promoting the sciences and useful arts, remember?
I do not respect the disgusting perversion of copyright that greatly restricts new art based on the old (How many of Walt's classic movies are an entirely new storyline and NOT based on fairy tales, legends, or other earlier works? Steamboat Bill Jr, anyone?). Most art, and perhaps all science, builds on what has been done before. To quote Einstein; "If I have seen further than other men, it is only because I have stood on the shoulders of giants"
I do not respect the "Mickey Mouse Protection Act" (Sonny Bono, etc), a 'copyright' extended so far that any work you see created in your lifetime will not enter the public domain until long after you die.
And I do not respect the DMCA, a disgusting perversion of 'copyright' that restricts what has traditionally been 'unregulated' use. Not just fair use, but 'unregulated use' completely unrelated to the act of 'copying' in any traditional sense. Studying and understanding something that I legitimately bought, or even using something that I OWN in unconventional ways.
I know what I believe in. There's no contradiction here.
Congress has the right to grant to authors and inventors exclusive rights to their works or discoveries, to promote the sciences and useful arts.
They don't have any obligation to do so, and if a company is using copyright in a way that is so clearly damaging (as Microsoft is), the most effective remedy congress could impose is this;
"You have abused this right that WE have granted you, so now we are going to revoke it".
Windows and Office become free to anyone that can obtain them through whatever means. What Microsoft subsequently do with the source code is entirely up to them. They might be able to continue making _some_ profit by releasing windows and office as an open-source product and selling support for it, which seems to be a viable business model for most Linux vendors.
Except in some countries, where it's forced to call itself sym------tion.
He holds the can in one hand, slowly rotating it while he waves the scanner around randomly until it beeps.
RFID would be a HUGE bonus!!!
perhaps if he hadn't been looking at porn and jerking off so much, he wouldn't have gone blind in the first place!! :-)
Verne has the same problem; he complained about the high 'teller' charges, and the bank told him that he should use the ATM machine. "they have braile on the buttons".
Well, there's a couple of problems with that. Not all (relatively few, apparently!) blind people know braile for a start. Verne doesn't.
And the ATM machine doesn't provide any feedback.
They don't speak, and when they beep it's only to draw attention to something on the screen.
There's no indication that the machine accepted the pin number, got the right account, declined a transaction due to insufficient funds, or anything. Need your account balance? forget it!
.. well, still working on, in my 'copious free time'.
My blind friend uses a barcode reader to scan cans and bottles in his cupboards. At the moment, the script looks up the product description from a textfile provided by the local supermarket, but we've found things like "WAT TM SSE" to be less-than-ideal. (it runs under linux, scanner plugs into keyboard plug, script runs on console, greps for barcode and reads the 'description' via festival.)
The next version, his wife will be able to scan the groceries and record a proper description, cooking instructions, etc, as short mp3 files while she unpacks the weekly shopping.
So, no more cat-food or tomato-sauce incidents when he's looking for a can of spagetti for lunch!
We named out first child "Destiny". People keep asking me what it means (why? I don't know?!) so I tell them it means "shit happens".
And the second one is "Cairo"