Umm no. Mandrake does NOT put you in the root account. There is only ONE root user. I know that Mandrake, SuSE and Red Hat do not have the user login as root. Most of them also change the back ground to some scary red image when you log in as root and also warn you when you first log in that it is not safe. The ONLY brain dead flavor of Linux I have heard of that does this is Lindows. And if Lindows ever gets big, they will pay dearly for it.
This is NO different then a basic install of Red Hat. NO user is in the Administrator/root account. A default fire wall is turned on, and automatic update are downloaded through Red Hats up2date RHN network. The one thing that make the security tigher under Linux is that the user is NOT running in the Administrator account where as I bet your Mom is running a user that is part of the Administrator accout, or do you have her running runas all the time to instll software?
Your opinion quite frankly is not very worthwhile. First, losing a home directory under any OS is a _Very_ bad thing. You can't reinstall your home directory from a CD.
What? I can reinstall my ~/ under Linux from a CD in 1 minute.
In XP this isn't true, in Server 2003 this isn't true, in Windows 2000 this isn't truee, in Windows NT this isn't true.
Sure you can have users that are not in the administrator account. However, when you go through a NORMAL windows xp or windows 2000 install, the users that a home user creates at the end of the install ARE in the Administrator group and these are the users that MOST home users are running as. In Linux, the users you make at the end of the install or at any other time are NOT in the root (uid=0) acount.
And those same users, if they were in Linux would not be using Linux. Because they couldn't figure out how to install it.
Total FUD. Have you tried to install any of the last few versions of Red Hat, SuSE or Mandrake? A monkey could install them and I have had plenty of not-technical users do an install. You just click a few buttons and your done.
They will execute the ".sh" file attached to the mail message. The script will alias some worthwhile commands and wait for the user to give it the root password.
Sorry it doesn't work that way. Just because a file has an extension of.sh DOES NOT make it an executable file, unlike in MS Windows where MS Windows will try to execute.exe,.bat, etc for you. In Linux, the file NEEDS to be marked as an executable OR it needs to be ran as an argument to another executable applications, i.e./bin/bash trojan.sh. Just clicking on a script or file attachment in a Linux mailer will have NO effect.
The DRIVERS you bone head. They are made by the manufactuer, not MS. The availability of drivers for USB devices in MS Windows has nothing to do with MS, well besides the fact that you have to pay MS to develop on their platform.
I don't run windows, and when I ever need to, I don't run as local admin. I am talking about the millions of Joe users out there that are running in the administrators account out-of-the-box and don't know better not to. This is not their fault, it is the fault of MS for making that decision to put user in the local Administrators group out-of-the-box.
HHhhmmm, and if I am root I can easily change permission on files and directories also. What's your point?
The point is that Linux (as well as Mac OS X) out-of-the-box has no users running as root. Running in the Administrator account is the default for MS Windows. The ONLY flavor of Linux I have heard that does somehting this stupid is Lindows. And Lindows will be hit just as hard as MS Windows if it ever gets any market share for doing something this dumb.
No it wouldn't. The program would still need to crack the root password. Just becaue you ran su or sudo doesn't mean any program could then run as root.
What are you talking about bone head? I hot plug my USB CD writer all the time under Linx with no problems. I hot plug my Archos MP3 recorder all the time under Linux. I hot plug my HP PSC 2110 printer/scanner/copier all the time in Linux with no problems. I hot plug my USB mouse all the time in Linux on my laptop with no problems. I hot plug my digtial camera all the time under Linux with not problems. All the above devices work perfectly under Linux with no problems and no reboot. Also, the USB support under MS Windows has nothing to do with MS Windows. It is becasue manufactuers make drivers, not because of MS Windows. Go trol somewhere else.
That's a false statement. I guess you haven't heard about the concept of NTFS file permissions, which have been around since, oh, 1993.
Umm, nope. It doesn't matter if your are in the ADMINISTRATORS group. You can easily delete a file or change the ACL.
Again, another false statement. Why do you, obviously good with Linux, automatically assume you know everything about Windows when it's pretty obvious you haven't a clue?
Nice try. I have been developing windows based software for fortune 500 companies for many years now. It doesn't matter if you deny me rights to a file. If I am in the Administrators group, I can change those rights back VERY EASILY. I can also right a program that will let me change the rights to any file if the program is ran by a user in the Administrators account. NTFS only makes a difference if the user is NOT in the Administrators group. Sadly, almost all home users of any MS Windows OS are running with Administrator priveledges. If you don't believe me, go ahead and try to delete C:\winnt or C:\windows as a user in the Administrators group an see what happens. The only time the ACL makes a difference is if it is set by an Domain Administrator. However, most home user are not running a domain controller.
I personally don't use any MS OS at my home. I am talking about the millions of average Joe users that will do it that way. You may have the technical know-how to not be in the Administrators group by default, however the millions of people out ther running XP Home or XP professional or any version of MS OS will be part of the Administrators group by default.
Maybe I should have elaborated. My home network runs only Linux. If my wife got hit with some Linux virus her/home and ONLY her/home could be borked. My data and the OS is still fine. Next, I run a simple backup every night that just copies our files to another directory that is readable/writable by root ONLY. The data is now safe. A quick cp -a or rsync command and I am back in business. With MS Windows it is not even close. The virus can wipe out ALL users data as well as the OS. That is the problem by having every Joe user running in the Administrator account. I am not trying to say that Linux is the best for security. Every OS will have holes because it is just impossible to design a comupter system without them. I just think that Linux and Unix have a better secutiry model to stop a virus from destroying all data and doing as much damage. I personally don't blame this latest virus entirly on MS. Part of it is their fault for a poor choice to sacrifce security for usability. While the other fault is because of the "AOL" type user that happily runs any crap they are sent. My grandfather-in-law has sent me tons of viruses without knowing. I bet he is one of the 1.5 million people that fell for this virus/trojan.
On my Linux system there is my/home and the/home for my wife. If my wife got hit with some Linux virus, then ONLY here data is borked, not mine. This is not the situation under MS Windows. Also, I do a simple backup of both home directories every nite and put it in a directory ONLY readable/writable by root. So the data is safe. Since the virus did not wipe out the OS, I am back up and running with a simple rsync command. Again, this isn't the case under MS Windows where a virus can wipe out the data for ALL users AND destroy the OS.
First, mailers under Linux do not auto-open attachments and run them. Second, even if a user saves the file and double-clicks it, nothing would happen, the file needs to be marked as an executable. Just because a file ends in.exe doesn't make it an executable as it does under MS Windows. I do agree that the email look very officail. Third, if the user saves it, marks it as an executable and runs it, it would only run as that user and NOT administartor/root, unless of course you use crappy Lindows, and keep loggin in as root. Then yes, it could do just as much damage.
Very true. Though I personally do not think it is a real security flaw to get a virus. I think it is a bad design choice on the part of MS. Very few apps should run as administrator/root. And the ones that do need to be carefully programmed. Under MS Windows, everything the user runs is running as administrator out-of-the-box, and it just opens up the possiblility for all kinds of attaks.
Yup, Lindows is crap. Lindows would be open to all sorts of attacks if it ever became popular. As far as SuSE goes and Red Hat as well, they prompt you for the root password when you need to run certain programs as root. This doesn't work with just any program, only a few administrative type programs. It also does not "save" the root password, it caches that you successuflly entered the password and won't prompt you again for 2-5 minutes, similar to sudo. Though agian, this is only for a handful of administrative programs so a user can admin their PC without needing to log in as root.
I agree, I got this email about 10 times. Though I am on Linux, I still find it hard to believe that 1.5 million people would run the "update". These are probably the same AOL users that sent their credit card numbers over AIM because someone said they work for AOL.
No, because Linux by default does not put every user into the administrator group. If you run a malicious attachment, it will be pretty much harmless to the machine. It may be able to wipe out your home directory, but that is about it. Plus, I haven't heard of any Linux mailer that will execute an attachment for you, it usually only saves it for you, or maybe display it if it is an image. If MS would not make every user an administrator by default, then most of these viruses would be stopped cold. However, the user friendliness of MS Widnows would drop considerably and not be much easier to use then a Linux desktop.
A lot of people wil blame it on "dumb" end-users. However, the scary thing is that just by an end-user clicking on the attachment in the email, they could hose their system. Even if an end user executed an attachement under Linux, it would only run as an that user, not Administrator or root. The worst that would happen is the users home directory being deleted. This is why MS Windows security is so bad IMO. Every user runs as Administrator out-of-the-box. This is the only reason ms windows is said to be "user friendly". Take a user out of Administrator mode and it is not any more user friendly then Linux. MS picked user friendly over security. Sure there are some tech savvy ms windows users that can secure their boxes much better then the masses. However, for the average user, MS gave them a friendlier environment to work in with no regards to the value of their data.
Because you would have to be an idiot to run Apache under MS Windows for anything other then development. Apache 1.3.x is still the most used version of Apache. That version does not have threading support that the newer 2.x version does. Spawing processes under MS Windows is SO much more expensive then under Linux/*nix which cause Apache 1.3.x to have poor performance under MS Windows while having good performance under *nix. The 2.x version runs OK under MS Windows, however it is still an app that was designed for a *nix type environment and that is where it runs best. Just as I can run Photoshop 7 under Wine, it works but not as useful as under an MS Windows or Mac environmnet.
Where is the Linux version or any non-MS version? Looking at the site I see this for the requirments:
Ability Office 2002 System Requirements:
Windows 95/98/ME/NT/2000/XP Processor: Pentium class or higher recommended 40 MB hard disk space required during download and setup Less than 25 MB for full installation after setup 32MB RAM Mouse or other Windows pointer device
MSN will ever beat out google. Their search engine is too biased. I just searched www.msn.com for Linux and got this link: Alternatives to Linux-Apache-MySQL-PHP. The same search on google returns very relevant material. How does MSN get alternatives for Linux from a search on just Linux and give it a rank of 4? I can also see MSN slowly adding features that "require" IE only to "persuade" users to have an MS only OS. MSN, no thanks.
And yet is still is 4 to 5 times more secure than Linux.
Bull. Most of the expliots for applications that run under Linux do not come close to the damage of the exploits and viruses that affect MS Windows. The RPC exploit, Blaster, SQL Slammer and other have cost companies billions of dollars per year. There has not been any other OS that has had ANY exploit cause that much damage. Please don't tell me it is because of the wide spread use of MS Windows. While MS Windows may have the monopoly on the desktop, they have a small percentage of the server market. Apache makes up more then 65% of the web server market. The OpenSSL hole didn't cause any where near the amount of damage that all the IIS holes have caused.
Funny in our labs, we download more Linux patches than we do Windows patches, and many of the Linux patches require reboots. Do you have a magical version of Linux you are not sharing with us?
Now you are showing YOUR stupidity. The ONLY patches on Linux that EVER require a reboot is a new kernel. Period. If you reboot for any other reason then you are just an idot. I have been developing for Linux, Windows and Solaris for years, and the only one of the three that needs a reboot for most patches is MS Windows. NO patch under Linux needs a reboot unless it is a NEW KERNEL. At most you just stop and start a server with something like: /etc/rc.d/init.d/http restart
Bam, your done.
And what do you thing WindowsXP Embedded is? Right here you lost everyone's respect of having any knowledge on this subject.
The article said it was a stripped down version of Windows NT, not embedded windows. There is a difference shit for brains.
I feel sorry for the company that is employing you. Ignorance with arrogance is a dangerous thing for a person in a decision making position.
Nice try troll. I haven't worked for fortune 500 companies for the last 8 years with C, C++, Perl, PHP and Java under Windows, Solaris and Linux for my good looks.
I suggest you go troll somewhere else unless you really need the accolades of the script kiddies... The true Open Source Linux,*nix, and NT professionals here really get tired of uninformed rhetoric from self proclaimed bloviating experts.
I am not trolling, just stating an opinion. You should stop your crying just because someone says something negative about your beloved billy boy. Also, don't try to act like the official spokesman for The true Open Source Linux,*nix, and NT professionals here. I am sure the people of/. can do much better then you.
That is the beauty of embedded Linux. You can build it how YOU want and only have the minimum needed for your application. With MS, there is no way to tail the base OS for your needs, it is one size fits all. This is what actually makes it easier to build on embedded Linux vs embedded Windows IMO.
Slashdot Mirror
Umm no. Mandrake does NOT put you in the root account. There is only ONE root user. I know that Mandrake, SuSE and Red Hat do not have the user login as root. Most of them also change the back ground to some scary red image when you log in as root and also warn you when you first log in that it is not safe. The ONLY brain dead flavor of Linux I have heard of that does this is Lindows. And if Lindows ever gets big, they will pay dearly for it.
This is NO different then a basic install of Red Hat. NO user is in the Administrator/root account. A default fire wall is turned on, and automatic update are downloaded through Red Hats up2date RHN network. The one thing that make the security tigher under Linux is that the user is NOT running in the Administrator account where as I bet your Mom is running a user that is part of the Administrator accout, or do you have her running runas all the time to instll software?
The DRIVERS you bone head. They are made by the manufactuer, not MS. The availability of drivers for USB devices in MS Windows has nothing to do with MS, well besides the fact that you have to pay MS to develop on their platform.
No it wouldn't. The program would still need to crack the root password. Just becaue you ran su or sudo doesn't mean any program could then run as root.
What are you talking about bone head? I hot plug my USB CD writer all the time under Linx with no problems. I hot plug my Archos MP3 recorder all the time under Linux. I hot plug my HP PSC 2110 printer/scanner/copier all the time in Linux with no problems. I hot plug my USB mouse all the time in Linux on my laptop with no problems. I hot plug my digtial camera all the time under Linux with not problems. All the above devices work perfectly under Linux with no problems and no reboot. Also, the USB support under MS Windows has nothing to do with MS Windows. It is becasue manufactuers make drivers, not because of MS Windows. Go trol somewhere else.
I personally don't use any MS OS at my home. I am talking about the millions of average Joe users that will do it that way. You may have the technical know-how to not be in the Administrators group by default, however the millions of people out ther running XP Home or XP professional or any version of MS OS will be part of the Administrators group by default.
Maybe I should have elaborated. My home network runs only Linux. If my wife got hit with some Linux virus her /home and ONLY her /home could be borked. My data and the OS is still fine. Next, I run a simple backup every night that just copies our files to another directory that is readable/writable by root ONLY. The data is now safe. A quick cp -a or rsync command and I am back in business. With MS Windows it is not even close. The virus can wipe out ALL users data as well as the OS. That is the problem by having every Joe user running in the Administrator account. I am not trying to say that Linux is the best for security. Every OS will have holes because it is just impossible to design a comupter system without them. I just think that Linux and Unix have a better secutiry model to stop a virus from destroying all data and doing as much damage. I personally don't blame this latest virus entirly on MS. Part of it is their fault for a poor choice to sacrifce security for usability. While the other fault is because of the "AOL" type user that happily runs any crap they are sent. My grandfather-in-law has sent me tons of viruses without knowing. I bet he is one of the 1.5 million people that fell for this virus/trojan.
On my Linux system there is my /home and the /home for my wife. If my wife got hit with some Linux virus, then ONLY here data is borked, not mine. This is not the situation under MS Windows. Also, I do a simple backup of both home directories every nite and put it in a directory ONLY readable/writable by root. So the data is safe. Since the virus did not wipe out the OS, I am back up and running with a simple rsync command. Again, this isn't the case under MS Windows where a virus can wipe out the data for ALL users AND destroy the OS.
You forgot to add Tiffany's pricing : )
First, mailers under Linux do not auto-open attachments and run them. Second, even if a user saves the file and double-clicks it, nothing would happen, the file needs to be marked as an executable. Just because a file ends in .exe doesn't make it an executable as it does under MS Windows. I do agree that the email look very officail. Third, if the user saves it, marks it as an executable and runs it, it would only run as that user and NOT administartor/root, unless of course you use crappy Lindows, and keep loggin in as root. Then yes, it could do just as much damage.
Very true. Though I personally do not think it is a real security flaw to get a virus. I think it is a bad design choice on the part of MS. Very few apps should run as administrator/root. And the ones that do need to be carefully programmed. Under MS Windows, everything the user runs is running as administrator out-of-the-box, and it just opens up the possiblility for all kinds of attaks.
Yup, Lindows is crap. Lindows would be open to all sorts of attacks if it ever became popular. As far as SuSE goes and Red Hat as well, they prompt you for the root password when you need to run certain programs as root. This doesn't work with just any program, only a few administrative type programs. It also does not "save" the root password, it caches that you successuflly entered the password and won't prompt you again for 2-5 minutes, similar to sudo. Though agian, this is only for a handful of administrative programs so a user can admin their PC without needing to log in as root.
I agree, I got this email about 10 times. Though I am on Linux, I still find it hard to believe that 1.5 million people would run the "update". These are probably the same AOL users that sent their credit card numbers over AIM because someone said they work for AOL.
Yes it does. When you do a new install and create user names, they are all in the administrators group, which gives you total control to the system.
No, because Linux by default does not put every user into the administrator group. If you run a malicious attachment, it will be pretty much harmless to the machine. It may be able to wipe out your home directory, but that is about it. Plus, I haven't heard of any Linux mailer that will execute an attachment for you, it usually only saves it for you, or maybe display it if it is an image. If MS would not make every user an administrator by default, then most of these viruses would be stopped cold. However, the user friendliness of MS Widnows would drop considerably and not be much easier to use then a Linux desktop.
A lot of people wil blame it on "dumb" end-users. However, the scary thing is that just by an end-user clicking on the attachment in the email, they could hose their system. Even if an end user executed an attachement under Linux, it would only run as an that user, not Administrator or root. The worst that would happen is the users home directory being deleted. This is why MS Windows security is so bad IMO. Every user runs as Administrator out-of-the-box. This is the only reason ms windows is said to be "user friendly". Take a user out of Administrator mode and it is not any more user friendly then Linux. MS picked user friendly over security. Sure there are some tech savvy ms windows users that can secure their boxes much better then the masses. However, for the average user, MS gave them a friendlier environment to work in with no regards to the value of their data.
Because you would have to be an idiot to run Apache under MS Windows for anything other then development. Apache 1.3.x is still the most used version of Apache. That version does not have threading support that the newer 2.x version does. Spawing processes under MS Windows is SO much more expensive then under Linux/*nix which cause Apache 1.3.x to have poor performance under MS Windows while having good performance under *nix. The 2.x version runs OK under MS Windows, however it is still an app that was designed for a *nix type environment and that is where it runs best. Just as I can run Photoshop 7 under Wine, it works but not as useful as under an MS Windows or Mac environmnet.
MSN will ever beat out google. Their search engine is too biased. I just searched www.msn.com for Linux and got this link: Alternatives to Linux-Apache-MySQL-PHP. The same search on google returns very relevant material. How does MSN get alternatives for Linux from a search on just Linux and give it a rank of 4? I can also see MSN slowly adding features that "require" IE only to "persuade" users to have an MS only OS. MSN, no thanks.
Bam, your done. The article said it was a stripped down version of Windows NT, not embedded windows. There is a difference shit for brains. Nice try troll. I haven't worked for fortune 500 companies for the last 8 years with C, C++, Perl, PHP and Java under Windows, Solaris and Linux for my good looks. I am not trolling, just stating an opinion. You should stop your crying just because someone says something negative about your beloved billy boy. Also, don't try to act like the official spokesman for The true Open Source Linux,*nix, and NT professionals here. I am sure the people of
So are you saying that windows does not need experts? Are you saying that it is acceptable to have non-experts build an ATM based on a MS Windows OS?
That is the beauty of embedded Linux. You can build it how YOU want and only have the minimum needed for your application. With MS, there is no way to tail the base OS for your needs, it is one size fits all. This is what actually makes it easier to build on embedded Linux vs embedded Windows IMO.