firstly do not compare driving to the internet. You are talking about publicly funded US government owned property when you are talking about driving. there is no surcharge to drive on most roads.
the internet is mostly privately owned, and as such can police itself on a company by company basis, the american (hypocrisy) gov't has no place or right to attempt to control or police the internet.
secondly there are actually very few safe gaurds in place to protect me from assholes who drive, there are however punishments for them if they break the law. and driving has been a common practice fo 60+ years, 60 years ago there were no speed limits, or stop lights etc..... that came after problems arose, and it did not interfere with usage, it actually helped. filtering the internet wont help despite what you (dense) people seem to think. filtering the internet is the first step towards allowing people to control what you can and cannot see, do etc.... and i am not going down that slippery slope. you trust gov'ts and private companies at your own peril. do not hinder me to protect complete morons and lazy assholes.
my terms of service say nothing about them having the right to block content regardless of what it is or where it is located, if they do i will sue.
i would also point out that nothing in this world is safe, driving using computers, walking in the woods. they all are dangerous and you wanting to make the internet some sanitary utopia is foolish and short sighted.
Just like how email filters work now, I'm sure port blocking will smooth out in the long run.
i make my living using the net, i am not paying $50 a month so i can deal with morons who think it will be fixed "in the long run"
My analogy to email filtering should be simple to understand. It works in the background, keeping most spam out without screwing around with the important stuff. Granted some things will screw up (both in user accessibility, and letting certain exploits through; this occurs in spam filtering as well), but you don't see people screaming about the how the world will change because spam filters are in place, do you?
i dont use spam filters because my experience with them has been very unkind, unconvienent and damn annoying. (from both the sending and recieving end) and i think you hit the nail on the head with one line Granted some things will screw up not an aaceptable instance, sorry pal the internet is my living i am NOT taking chances that some over zealous ISP level 2 twit thinks that.de needs to be blocked, then taking three days (or weeks or months depending on the ISP) to fix it.
the internet is not utopia, and ISP's are neither smart enough, well funded enough, or hard working enough to make it utopia.
upset cause your cable modem was only pulling 300/k down when sobig.f was at its peak ? cry me a fucking river.
"This is a hot-button issue and too many people are ready to "knee jerk" their way in to making foolish statements."
Like you ? did you stop midway through my post and ignore the rest ? or are you an ISP and implementing your "selective reading" filter ?
repost (for the 'filter' impaired):
and assuming that you will only block a few nominal ports, how long til the unblocked ports become commonly used, and hence exploited ?
if you want a block everything approach then you would be killing usability, if you want a block-minimal approach then you would be applying a band-aid to a much larger issue (issue=morons+script-kiddies).
scales are already tipped heavily in favor of Linux, unix on servers, yet we have not seen anything remotely close to a fast spreading worm.
microsoft makes inferior products, with stupid ass bugs, and a flawed design. thats why they get all of the virus's.
ask a virus writer to write a virus/worm for linux, see how far he makes it. then measure its effectiveness against an average MS virus/worm. not very far, i know people who have tried it.
yes but you shouldnt hinder the people who know what they are doing so the people who dont can be half-assed protected.
security comes in many forms my friend, a firewall is the most basic form of this, a firewall wont stop a mail or FTP based worm, or a dns exploit from happening. it will only stop a few mitagateable issues, and create massive pain for the most of us.
do you really think an ISP would do this for free ? no, they wont. and what makes you think they would let you opt-out (thereby missing out on the profits they would make from charging you to filter the internet) or what makes you think that they would make opting out easy ?
they would be much more likely to make opting-in to a firewall service easy then they would making opting-out because opting in generates money, opting-out loses potential profits.
yeah unless the ISP breaks shit, or takes to long to open XYZ port and you lose bussiness.
people who think the ISP's should filter anything are freakin lazy, shut your pie hole and build a firewall. and no i dont particularly care about joe schmoe getting a worm, thats his problem not mine.
lets make the speed limit 15MPH to accomodate grandma, her reflexes cant keep up with 45mph
you people need to realise that if you grant this power to these people they will abuse it in ways you or i have not yet thought of.
yeah, but would you be tickled pink if they blocked all of the game ports, or the.ca domain because canada has alot of leet script kiddies ? or what if they blocked slashdot ?
never give someone power unless it is earned, ISP's have not earned my trust and they shouldnt be given this power, to do so would be folly on your behalf.
ISP's provide a connection to the internet, past that its up to the user what to do with it. (and it should stay this way)
for that matter after the ISP's start blocking things how long til the government mandates blocking certain things ?
thats assuming people are using windows update. i am not, alot of my friends are not. i would rather not relive the upmteen experiences i have had over the past few years with ISP people staring at me like im insane when i tell them i dont own anything windows or mac related.
this isnt even touching the fact that the ISP's would then view anyone not running windows or mac as a security risk and would refuse to open the ports until we run a "standard OS".
thanks i'd rather avoid that problem. ISP's job is to run the damn line to my house and make sure their routing tables, mail, dns etc are working correctly, nothing more, nothing less.
so what your saying is that everything incoming should be blocked, save port 25, 110 (consumers need not have any other incomnig traffic)
right, so anything (games, aim, random non-standard website) that runs on a non-standard port should be blocked, genius idea. try explaining to joe schmoe why quake 3 wont work correctly because you dont want him to have to update his system, see what response you get (wait for a few minutes for it to sink in, you'll know its sinking in when the blank stare goes away)
and assuming that you will only block a few nominal ports, how long til the unblocked ports become commonly used, and hence exploited ?
if you want a block everything approach then you would be killing usability, if you want a block-minimal approach then you would be applying a band-aid to a much larger issue (issue=morons+script-kiddies).
and yes users do care about usability, otherwise they wouldnt run windows.
if you set it up so that everyone is behind a big firewall in the sky (which is what this would be) then what you end up with is ISP's saying "why do you want to opt-out" Or that you can't opt-out at all and you get stuck with their shitty firewall rules. you might also run into a problem where they will put you on this shitty little subnet with slower speeds/connection issues if you do opt out.
by saying it should be opt-out (in by default) then you put more power into the ISP's hands. and im sorry i already have enough issues with my ISP, the last thing i want to see is Time warner blocking port 53 incoming, or some other such cruft. (*cough* blocking msn *cough*)
no, its more like if the post man breaks-in and rumages around he should go to jail.
if you leave the front door wide open you couldnt convict him in an average court, he was "worried something may have happened to somebody".
besides in either case the postman isnt going to jail if it is his first conviction, he is getting probation. whereas hacking is equal to killing someone in the laws eyes, not just snooping around.
20 years to life for breaking into a computer system (for a first time offender)
5 years in prison or probation for breaking into a home or bussiness (for a first time offender)
Didn't anyone learn anything from losers like Kevin Mitnick?
Nope. if they did social engineering wouldnt be as easy as it is, and believe me it is EASY. i work for an outsourcing company (3000 employees, dual OC 192 connections, and two brand new V880's) and they dont employ ONE security person, they have no security policy. and we are doing work for some of the top companies in the telecom/datacom industry. amusing from my perspective anyway.
Mad hatter which is a "thick" client that runs Linux/Star-office/Evolution/Gnome and should* be selling for roughly half the price of the equivelent microsoft product.
with IBM and Sun (and oracle, and bea, and veritas and... you get the idea) behind linux that excuse is getting old quick.....
and actually you guys would be surprised the number of people/companies that run linux, the point is linux is silent, there wont be an outage caused by some worm/virus/maitnence like there is with microsoft, so you wont "hear" about someone running linux......
(of course i am refering to server side software, desktop is another issue)
"I contend that the Reagan supply side economics helped the economy grow."
"Probably did as much damage, long term, as help. You won't be getting as much Social Security. What the deficits did then and do now is allow this generation to spend profligately while making our children pay the bill. But then, how young are you? Maybe that's not such a bad idea..."
couldnt have said it better myself. in my opinion we should kill the baby boomers, first this crap, then they start shipping all the jobs overseas. bastards.
"Your exaggerated claims that "Linux will never have viruses or worms" are simply wrong.
The "Big Linux Worm" is waiting to happen and it will a doozie."
still waiting, like i have been for years.
Linux is not unix. i know this, but it IS based on unix, the ideas behind unix etc...
i dont forsee us having any issues with worms or virus's, and if we do it wont be me, i update major stuff daily and minor stuff weekly, and EVERY system i run is firewalled.
Security is not hard. good security is teduios but not hard.
you know im going to lay this straight out for every single virus writter/script kiddie out their. you think you can write a virus for linux thats effective, try it.
it *is* that simple, there is a reason that in the 30 year history of Unix there has NOT been anything even close to the kind of mass-moving virus's that windows suffers from. and i think that knocking out the backbone of the internet, or a bank is alot more enticing than somebodies PC.
i am so sick of you people claiming that Linux will have viruses when it gets "popular", it is popular, it has a very large share of the server market and is arguably the worlds 2nd most well known OS. yet we have no viruses.....
Unix is a much more secure system by design, Linus and the OSS community are much much better at getting things patched and rolling in hours, not days like microsoft. and equally important is the fact that the patch doesnt break things.
you know its funny you say that Linus is the only one who is allowed to commit changes to the kernel, but last i checked i could fork it if i wanted to, and it would be the same damn code, just called something different. try that with windows see how far you get. or try having a convorsation on the public development list for windows, with the main developers for windows. funny they dont have one of those. but im sure calling them on the phone and getting passed around , and ignored, maybe even called back and ignored is just as effective...... right ?
if microsoft has some of the world's top programmers then perhaps they should have them teach the other morons how to code correctly.
every single issue they have comes back to thier own incompotence, from making a shitty unstable piece of crap that made many people hate them, to intertwining the OS with a web browser and email client. it is their own doing, and that in and of itself proves that they dont have any good coders. and if they do i would like to know what the hell they do everyday.
however provided you dont want to spend the price of a car on an OS then whichever has the smallest market share is the one that wins. but if you run apache on it your asking for trouble because apache is top dog, and i would venture that apache, sendmail, and bind account for nearly 95% of all Unix/Unix-like exploits.
actually the argument could be made that OE was made with ease of use in mind, and nothing else. which is WHY it is such a pain in the ass for anyone who knows what they are doing.
at this point i would venture to say that most average people would be lost without OE and O when it comes to email.
i would also point out that the people who were using computers en mass before outlook express came along were a little more knowledgeable than the jackasses who use them now. so your comparison is useless. you would have to have an actuall study where multiple people with no experience were asked to learn pegasus and then the same for outlook express. see what they had problems with etc.....
despite what you seem to think microsoft got where it is by being a user friendly company.(and by stealing ideas/technology) outlook was "user friendly".
no most distro's do not. there are hundreds of distros out there and redhat and mandrake maybe what most people use, but that doesnt make them most distros.
for example any LFS based distro has nothing running by default except the bare bones stuff (init, getty etc...) and there are alot of LFS based distros out there.
yeah actually since we are on the topic it is woz's fault for making computers accessable to the common person, oh_no_wait its the guys at MIT that worked in the AI lab.... no wait it was the Tech Model Railroad Club.... no wait ITS THE PEOPLE WHO INVENTED COMPUTERS.... or al gore, since he invented everything. including but not limited to sliced bread, air, gas, the wheel, and fire.
get a grip. the mistake was made. virus's can be prevented by the end user, and no matter how stupid the OS assumes the user is the user will be stupider. i blame M$ for alot of things. but virus's are plague of the stoopids, stoopids leave unpatched, unfirewalled systems on 24x7 on a broadband connections. stoopids read attachments not knowing what they are. stoopids think longhorn is a good idea.
please please please PLEASE do not reference wired if you wish to garner any kind of respect.
and just for reference (as a person who works hell desk (tech support) for linux servers) i have not yet met a single person affected or infected by slapper. unix and unix derivatives are vastly more secure because of the way they were designed. not to mention most distro's dont leave 45 uneccasary things running by default, hence the admin of a unix box has to do less to be decently secured.
i will admit this virus wasnt particularly microsofts fault. but we have been doing this same routine for 8 -10 years now with them. sooner or latter they are going to have to own up to it, and yes microsofts systems are inherintly insecure. and no i dont run anything M$ on anything i own or admin.
i am also very aware that i am having a bad spelling day.
Slashdot Mirror
firstly do not compare driving to the internet. You are talking about publicly funded US government owned property when you are talking about driving. there is no surcharge to drive on most roads.
..... that came after problems arose, and it did not interfere with usage, it actually helped. filtering the internet wont help despite what you (dense) people seem to think. filtering the internet is the first step towards allowing people to control what you can and cannot see, do etc .... and i am not going down that slippery slope. you trust gov'ts and private companies at your own peril. do not hinder me to protect complete morons and lazy assholes.
the internet is mostly privately owned, and as such can police itself on a company by company basis, the american (hypocrisy) gov't has no place or right to attempt to control or police the internet.
secondly there are actually very few safe gaurds in place to protect me from assholes who drive, there are however punishments for them if they break the law. and driving has been a common practice fo 60+ years, 60 years ago there were no speed limits, or stop lights etc
my terms of service say nothing about them having the right to block content regardless of what it is or where it is located, if they do i will sue.
i would also point out that nothing in this world is safe, driving using computers, walking in the woods. they all are dangerous and you wanting to make the internet some sanitary utopia is foolish and short sighted.
so let me get this straight .....
.de needs to be blocked, then taking three days (or weeks or months depending on the ISP) to fix it.
Just like how email filters work now, I'm sure port blocking will smooth out in the long run.
i make my living using the net, i am not paying $50 a month so i can deal with morons who think it will be fixed "in the long run"
My analogy to email filtering should be simple to understand. It works in the background, keeping most spam out without screwing around with the important stuff. Granted some things will screw up (both in user accessibility, and letting certain exploits through; this occurs in spam filtering as well), but you don't see people screaming about the how the world will change because spam filters are in place, do you?
i dont use spam filters because my experience with them has been very unkind, unconvienent and damn annoying. (from both the sending and recieving end) and i think you hit the nail on the head with one line Granted some things will screw up not an aaceptable instance, sorry pal the internet is my living i am NOT taking chances that some over zealous ISP level 2 twit thinks that
the internet is not utopia, and ISP's are neither smart enough, well funded enough, or hard working enough to make it utopia.
upset cause your cable modem was only pulling 300/k down when sobig.f was at its peak ? cry me a fucking river.
"This is a hot-button issue and too many people are ready to "knee jerk" their way in to making foolish statements."
Like you ? did you stop midway through my post and ignore the rest ? or are you an ISP and implementing your "selective reading" filter ?
repost (for the 'filter' impaired): and assuming that you will only block a few nominal ports, how long til the unblocked ports become commonly used, and hence exploited ? if you want a block everything approach then you would be killing usability, if you want a block-minimal approach then you would be applying a band-aid to a much larger issue (issue=morons+script-kiddies).
or not.
scales are already tipped heavily in favor of Linux, unix on servers, yet we have not seen anything remotely close to a fast spreading worm.
microsoft makes inferior products, with stupid ass bugs, and a flawed design. thats why they get all of the virus's.
ask a virus writer to write a virus/worm for linux, see how far he makes it. then measure its effectiveness against an average MS virus/worm. not very far, i know people who have tried it.
yes but you shouldnt hinder the people who know what they are doing so the people who dont can be half-assed protected.
security comes in many forms my friend, a firewall is the most basic form of this, a firewall wont stop a mail or FTP based worm, or a dns exploit from happening. it will only stop a few mitagateable issues, and create massive pain for the most of us.
do you really think an ISP would do this for free ? no, they wont. and what makes you think they would let you opt-out (thereby missing out on the profits they would make from charging you to filter the internet) or what makes you think that they would make opting out easy ?
they would be much more likely to make opting-in to a firewall service easy then they would making opting-out because opting in generates money, opting-out loses potential profits.
yeah unless the ISP breaks shit, or takes to long to open XYZ port and you lose bussiness.
people who think the ISP's should filter anything are freakin lazy, shut your pie hole and build a firewall. and no i dont particularly care about joe schmoe getting a worm, thats his problem not mine.
lets make the speed limit 15MPH to accomodate grandma, her reflexes cant keep up with 45mph
you people need to realise that if you grant this power to these people they will abuse it in ways you or i have not yet thought of.
yeah, but would you be tickled pink if they blocked all of the game ports, or the .ca domain because canada has alot of leet script kiddies ? or what if they blocked slashdot ?
never give someone power unless it is earned, ISP's have not earned my trust and they shouldnt be given this power, to do so would be folly on your behalf.
ISP's provide a connection to the internet, past that its up to the user what to do with it. (and it should stay this way)
for that matter after the ISP's start blocking things how long til the government mandates blocking certain things ?
and the two ISP's cant have the same dumb ass bussiness people making decisions, which is highly unlikely at best.
thats assuming people are using windows update. i am not, alot of my friends are not. i would rather not relive the upmteen experiences i have had over the past few years with ISP people staring at me like im insane when i tell them i dont own anything windows or mac related.
this isnt even touching the fact that the ISP's would then view anyone not running windows or mac as a security risk and would refuse to open the ports until we run a "standard OS".
thanks i'd rather avoid that problem. ISP's job is to run the damn line to my house and make sure their routing tables, mail, dns etc are working correctly, nothing more, nothing less.
so what your saying is that everything incoming should be blocked, save port 25, 110 (consumers need not have any other incomnig traffic)
right, so anything (games, aim, random non-standard website) that runs on a non-standard port should be blocked, genius idea. try explaining to joe schmoe why quake 3 wont work correctly because you dont want him to have to update his system, see what response you get (wait for a few minutes for it to sink in, you'll know its sinking in when the blank stare goes away)
and assuming that you will only block a few nominal ports, how long til the unblocked ports become commonly used, and hence exploited ?
if you want a block everything approach then you would be killing usability, if you want a block-minimal approach then you would be applying a band-aid to a much larger issue (issue=morons+script-kiddies).
and yes users do care about usability, otherwise they wouldnt run windows.
i disagree.
if you set it up so that everyone is behind a big firewall in the sky (which is what this would be) then what you end up with is ISP's saying "why do you want to opt-out" Or that you can't opt-out at all and you get stuck with their shitty firewall rules. you might also run into a problem where they will put you on this shitty little subnet with slower speeds/connection issues if you do opt out.
by saying it should be opt-out (in by default) then you put more power into the ISP's hands. and im sorry i already have enough issues with my ISP, the last thing i want to see is Time warner blocking port 53 incoming, or some other such cruft. (*cough* blocking msn *cough*)
no, its more like if the post man breaks-in and rumages around he should go to jail.
if you leave the front door wide open you couldnt convict him in an average court, he was "worried something may have happened to somebody".
besides in either case the postman isnt going to jail if it is his first conviction, he is getting probation. whereas hacking is equal to killing someone in the laws eyes, not just snooping around.
20 years to life for breaking into a computer system (for a first time offender)
5 years in prison or probation for breaking into a home or bussiness (for a first time offender)
so i ask how is this fair ?
Didn't anyone learn anything from losers like Kevin Mitnick?
Nope. if they did social engineering wouldnt be as easy as it is, and believe me it is EASY. i work for an outsourcing company (3000 employees, dual OC 192 connections, and two brand new V880's) and they dont employ ONE security person, they have no security policy. and we are doing work for some of the top companies in the telecom/datacom industry. amusing from my perspective anyway.
Call Sun Microsystems.
Mad hatter which is a "thick" client that runs Linux/Star-office/Evolution/Gnome and should* be selling for roughly half the price of the equivelent microsoft product.
*= product not released until Oct 5th
with IBM and Sun (and oracle, and bea, and veritas and ... you get the idea) behind linux that excuse is getting old quick.....
......
and actually you guys would be surprised the number of people/companies that run linux, the point is linux is silent, there wont be an outage caused by some worm/virus/maitnence like there is with microsoft, so you wont "hear" about someone running linux
(of course i am refering to server side software, desktop is another issue)
mod parent up.
"I contend that the Reagan supply side economics helped the economy grow."
"Probably did as much damage, long term, as help. You won't be getting as much Social Security. What the deficits did then and do now is allow this generation to spend profligately while making our children pay the bill. But then, how young are you? Maybe that's not such a bad idea..."
couldnt have said it better myself. in my opinion we should kill the baby boomers, first this crap, then they start shipping all the jobs overseas. bastards.
"Your exaggerated claims that "Linux will never have viruses or worms" are simply wrong. The "Big Linux Worm" is waiting to happen and it will a doozie."
...
still waiting, like i have been for years.
Linux is not unix. i know this, but it IS based on unix, the ideas behind unix etc
i dont forsee us having any issues with worms or virus's, and if we do it wont be me, i update major stuff daily and minor stuff weekly, and EVERY system i run is firewalled.
Security is not hard. good security is teduios but not hard.
you know im going to lay this straight out for every single virus writter/script kiddie out their. you think you can write a virus for linux thats effective, try it.
.....
...... right ?
it *is* that simple, there is a reason that in the 30 year history of Unix there has NOT been anything even close to the kind of mass-moving virus's that windows suffers from. and i think that knocking out the backbone of the internet, or a bank is alot more enticing than somebodies PC.
i am so sick of you people claiming that Linux will have viruses when it gets "popular", it is popular, it has a very large share of the server market and is arguably the worlds 2nd most well known OS. yet we have no viruses
Unix is a much more secure system by design, Linus and the OSS community are much much better at getting things patched and rolling in hours, not days like microsoft. and equally important is the fact that the patch doesnt break things.
you know its funny you say that Linus is the only one who is allowed to commit changes to the kernel, but last i checked i could fork it if i wanted to, and it would be the same damn code, just called something different. try that with windows see how far you get. or try having a convorsation on the public development list for windows, with the main developers for windows. funny they dont have one of those. but im sure calling them on the phone and getting passed around , and ignored, maybe even called back and ignored is just as effective
if microsoft has some of the world's top programmers then perhaps they should have them teach the other morons how to code correctly.
every single issue they have comes back to thier own incompotence, from making a shitty unstable piece of crap that made many people hate them, to intertwining the OS with a web browser and email client. it is their own doing, and that in and of itself proves that they dont have any good coders. and if they do i would like to know what the hell they do everyday.
stupid cash-whore microsoft zealots.
actually the best OS is ..... Trusted Solaris.
however provided you dont want to spend the price of a car on an OS then whichever has the smallest market share is the one that wins. but if you run apache on it your asking for trouble because apache is top dog, and i would venture that apache, sendmail, and bind account for nearly 95% of all Unix/Unix-like exploits.
actually the argument could be made that OE was made with ease of use in mind, and nothing else. which is WHY it is such a pain in the ass for anyone who knows what they are doing.
.....
at this point i would venture to say that most average people would be lost without OE and O when it comes to email.
i would also point out that the people who were using computers en mass before outlook express came along were a little more knowledgeable than the jackasses who use them now. so your comparison is useless. you would have to have an actuall study where multiple people with no experience were asked to learn pegasus and then the same for outlook express. see what they had problems with etc
despite what you seem to think microsoft got where it is by being a user friendly company.(and by stealing ideas/technology) outlook was "user friendly".
no most distro's do not. there are hundreds of distros out there and redhat and mandrake maybe what most people use, but that doesnt make them most distros.
for example any LFS based distro has nothing running by default except the bare bones stuff (init, getty etc...) and there are alot of LFS based distros out there.
yeah actually since we are on the topic it is woz's fault for making computers accessable to the common person, oh_no_wait its the guys at MIT that worked in the AI lab.... no wait it was the Tech Model Railroad Club .... no wait ITS THE PEOPLE WHO INVENTED COMPUTERS .... or al gore, since he invented everything. including but not limited to sliced bread, air, gas, the wheel, and fire.
get a grip. the mistake was made. virus's can be prevented by the end user, and no matter how stupid the OS assumes the user is the user will be stupider. i blame M$ for alot of things. but virus's are plague of the stoopids, stoopids leave unpatched, unfirewalled systems on 24x7 on a broadband connections. stoopids read attachments not knowing what they are. stoopids think longhorn is a good idea.
please please please PLEASE do not reference wired if you wish to garner any kind of respect.
and just for reference (as a person who works hell desk (tech support) for linux servers) i have not yet met a single person affected or infected by slapper. unix and unix derivatives are vastly more secure because of the way they were designed. not to mention most distro's dont leave 45 uneccasary things running by default, hence the admin of a unix box has to do less to be decently secured.
i will admit this virus wasnt particularly microsofts fault. but we have been doing this same routine for 8 -10 years now with them. sooner or latter they are going to have to own up to it, and yes microsofts systems are inherintly insecure. and no i dont run anything M$ on anything i own or admin.
i am also very aware that i am having a bad spelling day.
agree to disagree it is then. no hard feelings eh ? lmfao ......
you wouldnt by any chance work for an outsourcing company would you ?