Most arguments for dual core reminds me very much for similar arguments for using dual CPU, apart from the price, that is.
A kernel compiled for a single CPU is faster than a kernel compiled for multipe CPU's, even when you only have one CPU. This is why OpenBSD has two kernels: 1) one cpu and 2) multpiple CPU's. The main developer of DragonBSD said that his preference is single CPU, performance wise (I'll leave that as a Google exercise).
Not OpenBSD, though. The development model of OpenBSD entails two releases each year
(1th May and 1th November), while until recently NetBSD and FreeBSD had a different model with years between each major release. Very loosly speaking, the OpenBSD model is time driven while the other *BSD is feature driven.
It's a bit funny that NetBSD and FreeBSD is released at the same time as OpenBSD traditionally has been.
NX doesn't help anything. It's trivial for an attacker to overwrite the return address with one that points to code that's in an executable section.
That depends on what the OS does with the NX bit, and what other preventions are in place. On OpenBSD the NX bit is just another piece of a puzzle to make the OS harder to exploit. Incidentally, on OpenBSD it's not trivial to overwrite the return adress the way you suggest.
Kids these days throw around the word "troll" like politicians throw around the words "terrorist" and "communist". It is often used out of context and at the wrong times, and thus has no true meaning any longer.
I just meta-moderated a troll as unfair, which I usually do, by the way. Just because a moderator disagrees with a post does not make the author of the post a troll.
Shouldn't this posting be titled: Smarter Google Ads Targets Stupid People Better.
There is so much information collected about you that they can correlate with values and behaviour of social groups.
This is then used to manipulate you, and it becomes increasingly difficult to protect yourself from that manipulation.
I run two colocated web servers on NetBSD. Both are stock installations and I haven't had any problems. The one thing I would like to see change is that a single IP address can do a dictionary attack on sshd for hours on end without OpenSSH saying "ok lets not listen to that IP address for a while.
Getty does this, or something like it, why not ssh?
Unless you have weak passwords, then this is not much of of a problem.
In the sshd_config you may disable password logins, and login using
a certificate. In addition, you may specify which users/groups that may login:
Protocol 2 PermitRootLogin no PasswordAuthentication no ClientAliveCountMax 5 ClientAliveInterval 30 AllowTcpForwarding no AllowUsers someuser
Many of those automated attempts to bruteforce sshd is run from a Linux machine, so a simple fix (if you use the OpenBSD packet filter that is ported to NetBSD) is qute simply to drop all packets to sshd that is sendt from a Linux computer.
3. It's half a day for Windows. It's 30 minutes for Linux. The upgrades for Linux are passive and don't require a reboot. I just did this for 5 servers (Installed Linux)and 10 desktops (OEM reinstall of XP 2002 SP1). At least OEM reinstall didn't require activation but it did require:
Not rebooting after an upgrade is usually a very bad idea. If the kernel is updated, then you MUST reboot. Deamons needs at least to be restarted. Since an upgrade is quite invasive, it's better to reboot just to make sure that your system will at least boot properly after a power outage.
In many cases it's a good idea schedule a reboot (at a convenient time) after you've made configuration changes. There are quite a few systems that won't boot/work properly due to unforseen power outage and many, many config changes.
The linux servers have no daemons running except for the database and ssh, there are times we go 6-12 months without needing a hotfix or patch. Even when they need patched it doesnt require a reboot, it doesn't take the machine down, and it doesn't change the day to day operation of the machine with new errors and new crashes.
The Linux kernel has had tens of local root kernel exploits the last year or so, so you don't patch the kernel? Or you are using an older kernel?
I'm a long time IT guy. When I first played with Linux a decade or so ago, I couldn't get my Matrox video card to work with X Windows using a Slackware distro. So, I gave it up. Some time later, I gave Red Hat a shot. It installed this time, but then I just sat there and twidled my thumbs. Now what? I couldn't find anything practical to do with it. Windows did everything I needed it to. Years later I tried again, this time with Gentoo. I could get things to compile, so I gave up again.
I stopped using Linux a few years ago after using SuSE for a couple of years. SuSE is nice as a Linux distro go, and I actually bought several SuSE releases. However, there where always some issues with it like YAST (the config tool) messing stuff up, or kernel source rpms that does not compile and different from the binary kernel rpm.
After attempting to put SuSE on an older machine to use as a home firewall, I gave up (SuSE insisted to install X libs in the "minimal" install) and tried OpenBSD instead. Besides, iptables syntax truly sucks big time.
OpenBSD is easier to administrate than SuSE, and very well documented with documentation that is uptodate and relevant. No more hunting for some outfodate howto that is not even correct. I ended up using OpenBSD on the desktop as well, and have never looked back.
So, I'm one of those that moved from Microsoft Windows to Linux and ended up with *BSD.
WMD are not going to be used by a country against another country. It would have happened in the 60's. What the real threat now is the technology and materials being available to radical groups to build their own bombs, or these groups getting a working bomb from a nuclear country.
Hiroshima? Nagasaki? Hint: august 1945. I don't think you are aware that USA is the only state to have used atomic bombs in war, and just for testing the effect in the first place.
Oh my gosh... where to begin. Yes, Iran and North Korea suddenly decided to develop WMD's because of the Bush administration... years before it began. They must have good psychics over there.
Yeah, sure, Iran has as much WMD as Iraq had. But hey, you only watch Fox "news", right?
This feels like envy and jealousy, the United States created a neat and shiny toy unnoticed by the world until it "became" the internet, and now the rest of the world wants some stewardship, whether it is warranted or not (in my opinion, not).
You are aware that the present administration has totally squandered any goodwill due to the horrible 9/11 incident? The US has very little credibility with regards to human rights and international law!
Even staunch European allies of USA are deeply concerned about the present US direction. Potential enemies are scared, so they have no choice but to develop WMD to pretect themselves. Very, very bad for all of us!!!!
The Chinese market will be the decisive battle ground between Linux and Windows.
Why? Most users don't care that much in the first place what OS they are using as long as it does what they want.
Indeed, whoever manages to become the leader in that market will soon become the world leader.
World leader in what? Shoddy software?
Why is that? Because the Chinese market has the potential to completely dwarf both the American and European markets. Once the Chinese market has matured, investors will think of American and the EU as they today think of Luxembourg and Jamaica.
I've had several harddisks die on me over the years, and for most home users a DVD/CD is still the most reliable backup media. External harddisks are not that reliable, as I'm sure that many will experience. Cheap IDE/SATA drives are cheap for a reason...
This does not imply that may DVD/CD media just about any way you want, of course.
If you handled a harddisk the same way you handled a DVD you'll quickly have a dead harddisk.
That's nice, but the reality is that DVDs as they exist and are used in the real world have a much higher failure rate than hard disks as they exist and are used in the real world. How they might fair in a parallel universe isn't terribly relevant.
So when you make backups, what do you use? Most home users can't afford a tape streamer, and harddisks are fragile. That leaves us with DVD/CD if you want to have a somewhat reliable backup in the "real world".
I don't have any statistics to back this up, but I'm willing to bet that hard drives are quite a bit more reliable than optical media. Perhaps not if you go around dropping them, but under normal use...
That's one bet you'll loose for sure. Harddisk are very fragile: they are sensitive to shocks and temperature. If you handled a harddisk the same way you handled a DVD you'll quickly have a dead harddisk.
.. so, if harddisk storage is so important for Bill Gates, why do I have to jump through hoops to get Windows 2000 to see more than 137 GB?
An interesting link. The data loss/corruption is worrisome. A crashing app is one thing, but filesystem corruption is much worse and may not be noticed before months has passed by rendering backups much ot-of-date:
* Operating systems that do not have 48-bit LBA support enabled by default (such as Microsoft Windows 98, Microsoft Windows Millennium Edition (Me), or Windows 2000) that are installed on a partition that spans beyond the 28-bit LBA boundary (137GB) will experience data corruption or data loss.
* After you enable 48-bit LBA support by adding the appropriate registry key, data corruption may occur if you remove the registry key or if you remove (uninstall) SP3 for Windows 2000.
I find it interesting how, in a world of IP, somebody out there ( Intel ) can still 'cheat' the system by creating dual core CPU's which still count as a single processor, thus allowing for a system like this.
Time changes: One upon a time multi-CPU was high-end and expensive. But now you'll find them on consumer PC very soon (in the form of dual core CPU), and Microsoft along with others will steadily relax the CPU count requirements. Of course, Intel is not "cheating" the system: they just make CPUs....
What worries Symantec as well is the new market for mobil phones using Windows, and they want a big part of that. But if Microsoft is shipping their own anti-virus then Symantec sells nothing.
People think that usability and security is incompatible, somehow. It is quite possible to have a fairly secure(able), but usable system as OpenBSD is one of several examples of. With Microsoft Windows this seems impossible. Of course, if you hand out the root/admin password all bets are off.
The need for anti-virus software is mostly a Windows-only thing, though.
Slashdot Mirror
The result of troll incest is quite amusing.
A kernel compiled for a single CPU is faster than a kernel compiled for multipe CPU's, even when you only have one CPU. This is why OpenBSD has two kernels: 1) one cpu and 2) multpiple CPU's. The main developer of DragonBSD said that his preference is single CPU, performance wise (I'll leave that as a Google exercise).
Not OpenBSD, though. The development model of OpenBSD entails two releases each year (1th May and 1th November), while until recently NetBSD and FreeBSD had a different model with years between each major release. Very loosly speaking, the OpenBSD model is time driven while the other *BSD is feature driven.
It's a bit funny that NetBSD and FreeBSD is released at the same time as OpenBSD traditionally has been.
It's clearly wrong! This one is much better.
That depends on what the OS does with the NX bit, and what other preventions are in place. On OpenBSD the NX bit is just another piece of a puzzle to make the OS harder to exploit. Incidentally, on OpenBSD it's not trivial to overwrite the return adress the way you suggest.
I just meta-moderated a troll as unfair, which I usually do, by the way. Just because a moderator disagrees with a post does not make the author of the post a troll.
There is so much information collected about you that they can correlate with values and behaviour of social groups. This is then used to manipulate you, and it becomes increasingly difficult to protect yourself from that manipulation.
Unless you have weak passwords, then this is not much of of a problem.
In the sshd_config you may disable password logins, and login using a certificate. In addition, you may specify which users/groups that may login:
Many of those automated attempts to bruteforce sshd is run from a Linux machine, so a simple fix (if you use the OpenBSD packet filter that is ported to NetBSD) is qute simply to drop all packets to sshd that is sendt from a Linux computer.
Not rebooting after an upgrade is usually a very bad idea. If the kernel is updated, then you MUST reboot. Deamons needs at least to be restarted. Since an upgrade is quite invasive, it's better to reboot just to make sure that your system will at least boot properly after a power outage.
In many cases it's a good idea schedule a reboot (at a convenient time) after you've made configuration changes. There are quite a few systems that won't boot/work properly due to unforseen power outage and many, many config changes.
The Linux kernel has had tens of local root kernel exploits the last year or so, so you don't patch the kernel? Or you are using an older kernel?
I stopped using Linux a few years ago after using SuSE for a couple of years. SuSE is nice as a Linux distro go, and I actually bought several SuSE releases. However, there where always some issues with it like YAST (the config tool) messing stuff up, or kernel source rpms that does not compile and different from the binary kernel rpm.
After attempting to put SuSE on an older machine to use as a home firewall, I gave up (SuSE insisted to install X libs in the "minimal" install) and tried OpenBSD instead. Besides, iptables syntax truly sucks big time.
OpenBSD is easier to administrate than SuSE, and very well documented with documentation that is uptodate and relevant. No more hunting for some outfodate howto that is not even correct. I ended up using OpenBSD on the desktop as well, and have never looked back.
So, I'm one of those that moved from Microsoft Windows to Linux and ended up with *BSD.
Hiroshima? Nagasaki? Hint: august 1945. I don't think you are aware that USA is the only state to have used atomic bombs in war, and just for testing the effect in the first place.
Oh my God, even for an AC you're not that bright. WMD != Molotov cocktails.
Yeah, sure, Iran has as much WMD as Iraq had. But hey, you only watch Fox "news", right?
You are aware that the present administration has totally squandered any goodwill due to the horrible 9/11 incident? The US has very little credibility with regards to human rights and international law!
Even staunch European allies of USA are deeply concerned about the present US direction. Potential enemies are scared, so they have no choice but to develop WMD to pretect themselves. Very, very bad for all of us!!!!
Why? Most users don't care that much in the first place what OS they are using as long as it does what they want. Indeed, whoever manages to become the leader in that market will soon become the world leader.
World leader in what? Shoddy software? Why is that? Because the Chinese market has the potential to completely dwarf both the American and European markets. Once the Chinese market has matured, investors will think of American and the EU as they today think of Luxembourg and Jamaica.
Who cares what some grubby investors think?
Not at all. Many corporations have shoddy products and bad customer service so they have higher profitability.
This does not imply that may DVD/CD media just about any way you want, of course.
So when you make backups, what do you use? Most home users can't afford a tape streamer, and harddisks are fragile. That leaves us with DVD/CD if you want to have a somewhat reliable backup in the "real world".
That's one bet you'll loose for sure. Harddisk are very fragile: they are sensitive to shocks and temperature. If you handled a harddisk the same way you handled a DVD you'll quickly have a dead harddisk.
An interesting link. The data loss/corruption is worrisome. A crashing app is one thing, but filesystem corruption is much worse and may not be noticed before months has passed by rendering backups much ot-of-date:
Time changes: One upon a time multi-CPU was high-end and expensive. But now you'll find them on consumer PC very soon (in the form of dual core CPU), and Microsoft along with others will steadily relax the CPU count requirements. Of course, Intel is not "cheating" the system: they just make CPUs....
What worries Symantec as well is the new market for mobil phones using Windows, and they want a big part of that. But if Microsoft is shipping their own anti-virus then Symantec sells nothing.
The need for anti-virus software is mostly a Windows-only thing, though.
Microsoft could make their software so secure that anti-virus programs are not a neccessity on Windows.