For the record, the box that got Nimda got it right after installation and right before we could apply the security patches. A third party consultant brought in a laptop that was infected and voila.
I am unfortunately only now gaining some administrative duties. I see SO many problems with the current configurations. The current Admin isn't really incompentent. He is quite intelligent, it is jus that the client we work for doesn't want to pay for extra people so that we can all do our jobs effectively. Most of the time our work is reactionary with little chance to properly maintain.
Hopefully between the two of us, we can get things working well and keep them working well.
As for our URL, there is no way in HELL I am giving that out. I can assure you our network isn't secure. At least the boxes on our DMZ isn't so bad. Our firewall is decent but runs on Windows so you know how that goes.
We are staying on security patches for the most part. But every minute of unapplied patches equals security risk. Sometimes it is an entire week before we get to apply the patches. Working in a 24/7 shop that doesn't tolerate downtime even if it is planned is VERY interesting.
Linux Server 1 = DNS Linux Server 2 = Secondary DNS Linux Server 3 = Snort Linux Server 4 = MTA
Windows Server 1 = Lotus Notes Windows Server 2 = Lotus Notes Windows Server 3 = Lotus Notes Windows Server 4 = File Server Windows Server 5 = RIS Server/Backup Server Windows Server 6 = Domain Controller Windows Server 7 = Domain Controller Windows Server 8 = Metaframe Server Windows Server 9 = SQL Server Windows Server 10 = SQL Server Windows Server 11 = SQL Server Windows Server 12 = Web Server Windows Server 13 = Multipurpose Development Server
At work, we have about 13 Windows 2000 servers. We have 4 Linux servers (En Garde). Here are some fun statistics for you to ponder:
W2K
-Every single one of the W2K boxes have had to been rebuilt at least once in the last 2 years -Three of the boxes have had been rebuilt 3 or more times in this same time period -The record uptime for our W2K servers is 3 months -Four of the servers have outright locked up and stopped responding even to ping packets
-The only time these servers have EVER gone down was once because lightning melted down a power substation that feeds our building and our battery backups didn't last long enough. Now that we have a diesel generator that can power us for days, we don't anticipate these servers to ever go down again
Currently our Fileserver is W2K but we are seriously considering moving it to Linux because we can't afford any downtime on that.
It seems to me that in countries like Japan, the consumer base is smaller than in America so it is essential to their survival to quickly release better and better models to continue to drive consumer demands (not to be confused with meeting consumer demands).
It seems to me that as time goes by and technology continues to be integrated deeper into every aspect of our lives that the population will be divided into 3 main categories:
1) Those who "get it" and understand technology on a deep level (i.e. slashdot readers et al)
2) Those who don't "get it" and just use it and hope it works
3) Those that attempt to control the two (i.e. governments and controlling corporations)
My fear is that group 3 will attempt to use the actions of group 1 to further restrict and control group 2. They can and likely will use incidents like this as ammunition to further their case. Think about it.
One of the rejected slogans . . .
on
Microsoft Freon
·
· Score: 1
"Freon, not to be confused with moron, gives Bill Gates a hard-on and helps half-witted geeks get their groove on!"
I think we would all agree this could potentially be a very dirty trick. I may disagree through and through with their plan and approach, but I can't totally blame them. Think about their perspective--
-Linux market share is gaining in every direction which means their market share is at extreme risk of dwindling. -There is no one company to compete with and/or buy out to remove the threat. -Even if they were able to keep Linux OS market share at bay, it will still continue to improve because the core development team can and will always exist.
When faced with an enemy they can't beat with their usual tactics, their last resort might just be to try something like this. Attacking from the back door could be their last hope at maintaining their dominance. Make no mistake about it, that is what they have to do in order to keep their identity.
It seems to me that Microsoft has realized the inevitability of software--it eventually reaches a point of commodity and finality. There is only so much you can do with a word processor to make it better. After that you are only complicating it. As the OSS alternatives quickly approach this state, there is no need to use the expensive version anymore.
Regardless of their initial intentions, it might be safe to say that if MS sees GPL and Linux suffering from this endeavor, they will try all the harder to push it. Be wary of any company that has everything to lose and plenty of resources to try and keep it.
It seems to me that most would probably agree that the extinction of the human race isn't quite likely. How many people out there built 100 year bomb shelters for y2k?
What is in question is whether society and culture would survive. There exists the greatest possibility that with a REALLY big asteroid or comet that humanity would be reduced to small pockets of survival here and there.
Then the question really becomes how much money are we as a society (not just US) willing to invest towards preserving all that we know as it is now? Since a completely devastating impact would completely devalue all currency, I honestly don't see where the point of contention is. But that is just me.
"Buy the machine from a Windows-selling OEM and refuse the EULA thne call MS and get your money back for that license."
I seem to recall a few years back a whole group of Linux users got together and tried to do just that. Any guess on the MS reply? "No soup for you!" They have their money and have no intentions of giving it back. Ever. Nice idea though.
While I wasn't in LA in the 70's and can't comment on its quality then, I can tell you it sucks now. BAD.
Without even doing any real research and assuming that it was indeed worse then as opposed to now (I am not sure it was) I can think of two things which may have improved its quality short term (it isn't getting better now). Leaded gasoline was banned about 20 years ago I think. That certainly helped. Improved technology in automobiles has helped improve car emissions and more strict clean air laws have helped clean up industry emissions.
Imagine what might happen if automobiles were outfitted with zero emissions engines that didn't require a battery charge (emissions from a power plant).
People will not stop listening to music. We haven't for some many thousands of years of human history. I really don't see any reason why we would now. It seems to me the only thing in danger are the music companies.
That being said, I personally have no remorse or sadness for the death of music companies. They once served a purpose, but now they are refusing to change their ways with the changing times and are repeatedly making it clear that they will stand in the way of any music technological innovation that doesn't receive their blessings.
It seems to me that you have three choices in the way of innovation--lead, follow or get out of the way. They are refusing to do any and thus will likely find themselves in serious trouble.
And of course there is increasing evidence that global warming does indeed exist.
What happens if you close your garage door and run your car for a while? The air turns quite unbreathable. Change that to a warehouse. Same thing, just takes longer. Take Mexico City. Same thing, it has taken a long time, but they have a serious problem.
Now take earth. How long will it take? No one knows, but all of these emissions sure as hell aren't escaping into space.
Global warming or not, air quality is degrading in cities that have heavy traffic. Population trends are continuing to rise and so is the amount of vehicles in use. At what point to those that don't believe us "environmentalists" start facing facts? Will it be before or after walking outside in cities requires an oxygen tank?
You are right. If we switch to environmentally friendly methods of energy creation then prices will go up and there will initially be those that can't afford it.
BUT, and this is a huge but, in the meantime of choosing the cheaper way, you destroy the environment bit by bit increasing asthma, sinus and lung cancer problems. The climate changes over time. Drought becomes more and more of a reality. Famine hits the poorer people first (and hopefully last). This isn't made up stuff. I wish it were.
There exists the greatest possibility that as we continue to choose the cheaper routes, a time will come when we can no longer choose the expensive ones.
I suppose you are right. Red Hat and other companies don't have to license technologies they create from those that patent them before them. They could take them to court, spend all their money on litigation and find themselves out of business. Go out with a fight, right? I find that a logical fallacy if that is indeed what you are incinuating since I see nothing in your post to say why my postulation isn't correct.
You are right about one thing--the current state of the patent system is in bad need of repair. Possibly a complete reworking. That doesn't mean it is a good idea to ignore it in its current state. If Red Hat doesn't play by the rules that its competitors are (both OSS and proprietary) it could quickly find itself in litigation hell.
I really would like to know how me pointing out this from a vantage point of self-preservation (note NOT financial gain) fails to address the objections of the original post. But don't take my word for it--"One defense against such misuse is to develop a corresponding portfolio of software patents for defensive purposes." (http://www.redhat.com/legal/patent_policy.html)
It seems to me that Red Hat (and other OSS companies) have basically two choices-- A) Patent your technologies so that others may not or B) Don't patent them and be forced to license them from those that do.
There is no gray area here. For better or worse, companies are obtaining software patents. In some cases, some of them are for stuff they had nothing to do with. You can say what you want, but the fact remains that anything Red Hat and company produce outside the realm of the standard Linux kernel is subject to being patented by someone else.
Some companies have billions in the bank ready to fight off lawsuits, Red Hat isn't one of them.
You should probably thank everyone involved in Blade Runner. I bet good money if you asked most sci-fi directors today they would tell you how much that film influenced and inspired them.
Because I want choices. Forcing me to use an operating system to perform a task takes the power for me to choose my methods of being a consumer and places them in the law's hands.
All I want is to use something I have already paid for in a way that is legal. Watching my DVD's on a Linux box is NOT illegal in and of itself. They are trying to make it so by outlawing DeCSS. Let's be honest about it. It isn't the tool that scares them. It is the fact that they have no control over it. That is really what this is all about--control. Anyone who thinks otherwise is blind to the truth.
THAT is why I sing praises for Linux and speak the truth of Microsoft. And the truth shall set you free.
If you want to use a gun analogy, it is more like storing your gun in a bank vault and the bank allowing somone posing as an employee to steal the gun, shooting someone and framing your for the crime.
Ford had information that was their duty to protect. They failed to protect it. Not really that complicated of an issue.
Slashdot Mirror
For the record, the box that got Nimda got it right after installation and right before we could apply the security patches. A third party consultant brought in a laptop that was infected and voila.
I about forgot our Firewall. Windows 2000 box running Raptor. Not a terrible product.
That SHOULD read "At least the boxes not on our DMZ aren't so bad."
I am unfortunately only now gaining some administrative duties. I see SO many problems with the current configurations. The current Admin isn't really incompentent. He is quite intelligent, it is jus that the client we work for doesn't want to pay for extra people so that we can all do our jobs effectively. Most of the time our work is reactionary with little chance to properly maintain.
Hopefully between the two of us, we can get things working well and keep them working well.
As for our URL, there is no way in HELL I am giving that out. I can assure you our network isn't secure. At least the boxes on our DMZ isn't so bad. Our firewall is decent but runs on Windows so you know how that goes.
We are staying on security patches for the most part. But every minute of unapplied patches equals security risk. Sometimes it is an entire week before we get to apply the patches. Working in a 24/7 shop that doesn't tolerate downtime even if it is planned is VERY interesting.
Linux Server 1 = DNS
Linux Server 2 = Secondary DNS
Linux Server 3 = Snort
Linux Server 4 = MTA
Windows Server 1 = Lotus Notes
Windows Server 2 = Lotus Notes
Windows Server 3 = Lotus Notes
Windows Server 4 = File Server
Windows Server 5 = RIS Server/Backup Server
Windows Server 6 = Domain Controller
Windows Server 7 = Domain Controller
Windows Server 8 = Metaframe Server
Windows Server 9 = SQL Server
Windows Server 10 = SQL Server
Windows Server 11 = SQL Server
Windows Server 12 = Web Server
Windows Server 13 = Multipurpose Development Server
At work, we have about 13 Windows 2000 servers. We have 4 Linux servers (En Garde). Here are some fun statistics for you to ponder:
W2K
-Every single one of the W2K boxes have had to been rebuilt at least once in the last 2 years
-Three of the boxes have had been rebuilt 3 or more times in this same time period
-The record uptime for our W2K servers is 3 months
-Four of the servers have outright locked up and stopped responding even to ping packets
Reasons for rebuilds: Nimda, Driver corruptions, DLL corruptions, Unexplained software instability
En Garde Linux
-The only time these servers have EVER gone down was once because lightning melted down a power substation that feeds our building and our battery backups didn't last long enough. Now that we have a diesel generator that can power us for days, we don't anticipate these servers to ever go down again
Currently our Fileserver is W2K but we are seriously considering moving it to Linux because we can't afford any downtime on that.
It seems to me that in countries like Japan, the consumer base is smaller than in America so it is essential to their survival to quickly release better and better models to continue to drive consumer demands (not to be confused with meeting consumer demands).
It seems to me that as time goes by and technology continues to be integrated deeper into every aspect of our lives that the population will be divided into 3 main categories:
1) Those who "get it" and understand technology on a deep level (i.e. slashdot readers et al)
2) Those who don't "get it" and just use it and hope it works
3) Those that attempt to control the two (i.e. governments and controlling corporations)
My fear is that group 3 will attempt to use the actions of group 1 to further restrict and control group 2. They can and likely will use incidents like this as ammunition to further their case. Think about it.
"Freon, not to be confused with moron, gives Bill Gates a hard-on and helps half-witted geeks get their groove on!"
And it is only after I submit that I see Mr. A. Nonymous beat me to the punch on that one.
No, that would be "suck"
I think we would all agree this could potentially be a very dirty trick. I may disagree through and through with their plan and approach, but I can't totally blame them. Think about their perspective--
-Linux market share is gaining in every direction which means their market share is at extreme risk of dwindling.
-There is no one company to compete with and/or buy out to remove the threat.
-Even if they were able to keep Linux OS market share at bay, it will still continue to improve because the core development team can and will always exist.
When faced with an enemy they can't beat with their usual tactics, their last resort might just be to try something like this. Attacking from the back door could be their last hope at maintaining their dominance. Make no mistake about it, that is what they have to do in order to keep their identity.
It seems to me that Microsoft has realized the inevitability of software--it eventually reaches a point of commodity and finality. There is only so much you can do with a word processor to make it better. After that you are only complicating it. As the OSS alternatives quickly approach this state, there is no need to use the expensive version anymore.
Regardless of their initial intentions, it might be safe to say that if MS sees GPL and Linux suffering from this endeavor, they will try all the harder to push it. Be wary of any company that has everything to lose and plenty of resources to try and keep it.
It seems to me that most would probably agree that the extinction of the human race isn't quite likely. How many people out there built 100 year bomb shelters for y2k?
What is in question is whether society and culture would survive. There exists the greatest possibility that with a REALLY big asteroid or comet that humanity would be reduced to small pockets of survival here and there.
Then the question really becomes how much money are we as a society (not just US) willing to invest towards preserving all that we know as it is now? Since a completely devastating impact would completely devalue all currency, I honestly don't see where the point of contention is. But that is just me.
"Buy the machine from a Windows-selling OEM and refuse the EULA thne call MS and get your money back for that license."
I seem to recall a few years back a whole group of Linux users got together and tried to do just that. Any guess on the MS reply? "No soup for you!" They have their money and have no intentions of giving it back. Ever. Nice idea though.
While I wasn't in LA in the 70's and can't comment on its quality then, I can tell you it sucks now. BAD.
Without even doing any real research and assuming that it was indeed worse then as opposed to now (I am not sure it was) I can think of two things which may have improved its quality short term (it isn't getting better now). Leaded gasoline was banned about 20 years ago I think. That certainly helped. Improved technology in automobiles has helped improve car emissions and more strict clean air laws have helped clean up industry emissions.
Imagine what might happen if automobiles were outfitted with zero emissions engines that didn't require a battery charge (emissions from a power plant).
People will not stop listening to music. We haven't for some many thousands of years of human history. I really don't see any reason why we would now. It seems to me the only thing in danger are the music companies.
That being said, I personally have no remorse or sadness for the death of music companies. They once served a purpose, but now they are refusing to change their ways with the changing times and are repeatedly making it clear that they will stand in the way of any music technological innovation that doesn't receive their blessings.
It seems to me that you have three choices in the way of innovation--lead, follow or get out of the way. They are refusing to do any and thus will likely find themselves in serious trouble.
And of course there is increasing evidence that global warming does indeed exist.
What happens if you close your garage door and run your car for a while? The air turns quite unbreathable. Change that to a warehouse. Same thing, just takes longer. Take Mexico City. Same thing, it has taken a long time, but they have a serious problem.
Now take earth. How long will it take? No one knows, but all of these emissions sure as hell aren't escaping into space.
Global warming or not, air quality is degrading in cities that have heavy traffic. Population trends are continuing to rise and so is the amount of vehicles in use. At what point to those that don't believe us "environmentalists" start facing facts? Will it be before or after walking outside in cities requires an oxygen tank?
As opposed to gasoline that has an impressive fireball-type explosion and continues to burn until all of the gasoline has evaporated and burned?
You are right. If we switch to environmentally friendly methods of energy creation then prices will go up and there will initially be those that can't afford it.
BUT, and this is a huge but, in the meantime of choosing the cheaper way, you destroy the environment bit by bit increasing asthma, sinus and lung cancer problems. The climate changes over time. Drought becomes more and more of a reality. Famine hits the poorer people first (and hopefully last). This isn't made up stuff. I wish it were.
There exists the greatest possibility that as we continue to choose the cheaper routes, a time will come when we can no longer choose the expensive ones.
I suppose you are right. Red Hat and other companies don't have to license technologies they create from those that patent them before them. They could take them to court, spend all their money on litigation and find themselves out of business. Go out with a fight, right? I find that a logical fallacy if that is indeed what you are incinuating since I see nothing in your post to say why my postulation isn't correct.
You are right about one thing--the current state of the patent system is in bad need of repair. Possibly a complete reworking. That doesn't mean it is a good idea to ignore it in its current state. If Red Hat doesn't play by the rules that its competitors are (both OSS and proprietary) it could quickly find itself in litigation hell.
I really would like to know how me pointing out this from a vantage point of self-preservation (note NOT financial gain) fails to address the objections of the original post. But don't take my word for it--"One defense against such misuse is to develop a corresponding portfolio of software patents for defensive purposes." (http://www.redhat.com/legal/patent_policy.html)
It seems to me that Red Hat (and other OSS companies) have basically two choices-- A) Patent your technologies so that others may not or B) Don't patent them and be forced to license them from those that do.
There is no gray area here. For better or worse, companies are obtaining software patents. In some cases, some of them are for stuff they had nothing to do with. You can say what you want, but the fact remains that anything Red Hat and company produce outside the realm of the standard Linux kernel is subject to being patented by someone else.
Some companies have billions in the bank ready to fight off lawsuits, Red Hat isn't one of them.
Not all of these are subversive:
-If her dorm allows it, a window A/C unit.
-If it gets cold where she is going, a good space heater.
-A GOOD air filter with replacement filters
-A dehumidifier
-Something that will make a room smell good like a scented oil burner or Plugins
-Keychain bottle opener
-Membership to local gym
-Scanner for hours of cordless phone fun
-Universal Remote
-Multitool
-White noise device to cover dorm noise at night
You should probably thank everyone involved in Blade Runner. I bet good money if you asked most sci-fi directors today they would tell you how much that film influenced and inspired them.
Because I want choices. Forcing me to use an operating system to perform a task takes the power for me to choose my methods of being a consumer and places them in the law's hands.
All I want is to use something I have already paid for in a way that is legal. Watching my DVD's on a Linux box is NOT illegal in and of itself. They are trying to make it so by outlawing DeCSS. Let's be honest about it. It isn't the tool that scares them. It is the fact that they have no control over it. That is really what this is all about--control. Anyone who thinks otherwise is blind to the truth.
THAT is why I sing praises for Linux and speak the truth of Microsoft. And the truth shall set you free.
Bad association.
If you want to use a gun analogy, it is more like storing your gun in a bank vault and the bank allowing somone posing as an employee to steal the gun, shooting someone and framing your for the crime.
Ford had information that was their duty to protect. They failed to protect it. Not really that complicated of an issue.