With Windows
Black hat - Reads about security flaw or discovers it - Exploit.
White hat - Searches for Security flaws with little source.
With Linux
Black hat - Reads about security flaw or discovers it - Exploit.
White hat - Searches source and submits patch.
95% of computers run Windows, so they can afford (or so they think) to write sloppy code.
More exploits would be found if Linux was in the majority, but the comunity is built in such a way that it would most likely be found while still in beta.
Equally shove a stupid windows user on a linux terminal and ask them to setup a decent firewall script...
You realize they can't do this natively in Windows, right? Why not ask them to do something they can do in Windows? Like enable the Firewall? Let's see. 5 Steps for Windows, on by default in Linux...
Download the latest patched kernel and just see how much fun they have...
I'm asuming that these stupid windows users you're talking about are the one's that keep loosing their Address Bar in IE. These are the same users that can't or won't use Windows Update because they don't have the time, or know they need to, so why would they want to update the kernel?
I am just trying to figure out how to strike a balance between limiting my exposure to liability in this networked world (because everyone is happy to sue these days) and still participating in society in normal ways.
Uh, hate to tell you, but unless you're sueing somebody you're not participating in society in normal ways.
If you head to your local Radio Shack, they should have the stuff. They'll have a little booklet you can buy to help prep you for the test. And make it a point to go to a few hamfests.
This is the book. The Beginner's Handbook of Amateur Radio, 4th Edition. I believe this is the right book.....
I'm a technician class ham and I've got two computers.
Desktop is running Windows 98 (as default boot) and Lycoris 1.19 (Hardly ever use the desktop, unless I want to print something)
Laptop is running Mandrake 9.1 (as default boot) with Windows XP. I only use Windows for.... hmmm..... yeah.... that's about it....
By that logic, Win95 is UNIX, too. Ever install cygwin? It's basically a UNIX-like environment that runs on Windows. In fact, cygwin is more compatible with UNIX/Linux than MacOSX is.
And if I use XPde as my window manager and some version of WINE on Linux, I must be using windows, because I can run windows programs, and I see the ugly start menu? Yeah?
No, Mr. Proud Mac User. MacOSX is NOT unix. It's MacOSX with a unix-like shell. It uses a non-standard kernel, non-standard file system layout, a non-standard API, and a non-standard windowing system. There's a reason why the Open Group said Apple can't use the term 'UNIX' to describe OS X.
Oh and about OS X isn't UNIX...
From this article The Open Group wants Apple to have Mac OS X undergo testing to certify that it complies with its standards for software bearing the Unix name; it also wants Apple to pay a fee. The Open Group says the costs to license the name are reasonable, based on the size of the company and the rough number of copies of the software Apple sells. In any case, no company is required to pay more than $110,000, said Graham Bird, vice president of marketing for The Open Group.
The only reason the Open Group won't give them their seal of approval is they want apple to pay.
You do realize that the people who program for Microsoft are normal everyday mistake making humans, right? You also realize that somebody spent a great deal of time trying to find that exploit, right?
No, people who program for Microsoft are 1337 mistake making humans. =p
I do hold Microsoft accountable because they tout their own products for being so "user-friendly" while they add no security into the products...if you're going to design an application that a child could use, for God's sakes, don't stop half-way, make sure the user is safe from the very ignorance your product feeds.
Mod parent up!
If only they would create an update that would stop Gator from working... without stopping everything else...
I know everyone is convinced that chads are the work of the devil, and caused all the problems in the 200 election, but I have to say that everyone is wrong.
I'm sorry, I'm not that old. How were the 200 elections? =p
Now, I don't know if you're naive or a an MS shill - but, in the past, whenever MS has talked about things like encouraging third party clients or open connectivity, they're talking about licensed partners, not OSS projects.
I've really got to agree. They aren't going to play nice with OSS, especially after OSS has been named Microsoft's #2nd greatest enemy.
This is in a sense another vender lock-in. Making people use Windows to use MSN Messenger.
Before you jump down my throat, yes, they have a right to legally. Morally, I don't think they do, but that is just a matter of my opinion. I don't really like MSN Messanger, so I'm not complaining. I just emailed all my friends telling them to start using my new address and a different messenger if they want to contact me. I'm happy. I just wish we could get more people to switch.
Yeah. They sent me 13 emails yesterday telling me that my third party IM client won't work anymore. Thanks. I don't know what I would have done without all 13.
OSes, by their very nature, are designed to be proprietary.
So what's the big secret? That ultra cool routine that converts hex to binary? Hey, hey, hey! You better guard that industrial secret!
Sorry. I'm really not trying to make fun. I need to be in bed. Asleep. Instead of reading slashdot...
Why are OSes designed to be proprietary? If so, why not car engines too? They both are used to run their respective machines. Just because I can see the oil pan (well not right not, but anyway) doesn't mean I'll copy it. Granted it's a great deal easier in the digital world, but the most likely thing to come from the open-source is the fixing of problems and the adding of features.
Of course, they're both just philosophies. They are just as right as the other.
Comparing PC software (does not get people killed) to a car (gets people killed) is just ridiculous.
So you definately weren't reading the slashdot headlines earlier today were you? You know,
the one that said Microsoft Worms Crash Ohio Nuke Plant, MD Trains. Noone died. But there was definately potential.
Why don't you place the blame where it belongs, with shitty admins who don't patch their systems? If you never patch that little Linux box you're using, you'll have the same problems. I don't see you jackasses yelling about the insecurity of Linux every time a patch comes out for it.
Uh, yeah. I think he was placing blame where it belongs. Part of the blame does rest on the sys admins. Part of the blame rests on the people that actually designed the software. "Placing the blame" is a joint venture between the users and the maker.
(Unless of course you go by the EULA, then Microsoft never did anything wrong.)
The reason most people don't complain about the Linux patches is most of the patches aren't for Linux. The great majority of patches are for third party programs.
Oh, one more major reason we complain about Windows more, is that we pay $99-$199 per copy of Windows, so we expect it to be working right. Linux gets a little more headway, because nobody has upgrade it. They do it for "The love of the game".
Most of your day is spent putting out fires. Fixing critical systems before all hell breaks loose
I worked on all the computers at my school, until I graduated. We had crappy computers made by a local company. They charged near $1200 per computer. Without monitor or keyboard. The county had a contract with them, so we couldn't buy from anyone else, no matter how much I campaigned. We kept them because "they have such good tech support." Right.... They showed up maybe once every two or three months. So from about the seventh grade, I was the computer repairman at school (until I graduated this spring).
Kinda funny. I was in class a fair ammount, so most of the time I never found out about anything until all hell had already broken loose... and the school secretary had already restarted the Novell server and Linux server without actually shutting them down....
If you have the problem I had I could hardly find time for patches between reminding users how to login (username and password, not ESC, ESC, ESC) and helping them find their precious solitare (and now pinball).
I don't mind that new patches weren't installed on the computer. I don't really trust the current patching system myself, but to allow a critical system to have a connection to the internet, where traffic is not going through a firewall is unspeakable.
Also, not knowing that there was a patch is unexcusable. Even if you don't install it, an administrator at least needs to know that the vulnerability exists.
I was under the impression that Microsoft didnt encourage the use of its products in applications such as these. We are talking about systems that cannot fail - if they do, people could die.
It's true, for life or death forms of systems, they don't mind.... as long as you don't use any competitors' system. Then they get ready to lay the smack down....
Slashdot Mirror
In Mandrake and Redhat, it won't let me install without creating at least one user account.
Maybe not the best for ease of use, but definately better for security.
Black hat - Reads about security flaw or discovers it - Exploit.
White hat - Searches for Security flaws with little source.
With Linux
Black hat - Reads about security flaw or discovers it - Exploit.
White hat - Searches source and submits patch.
95% of computers run Windows, so they can afford (or so they think) to write sloppy code.
More exploits would be found if Linux was in the majority, but the comunity is built in such a way that it would most likely be found while still in beta.
You realize they can't do this natively in Windows, right? Why not ask them to do something they can do in Windows? Like enable the Firewall? Let's see. 5 Steps for Windows, on by default in Linux...
Download the latest patched kernel and just see how much fun they have...
I'm asuming that these stupid windows users you're talking about are the one's that keep loosing their Address Bar in IE. These are the same users that can't or won't use Windows Update because they don't have the time, or know they need to, so why would they want to update the kernel?
Uh, hate to tell you, but unless you're sueing somebody you're not participating in society in normal ways.
Well, yeah, because you know we all make so much money...
Yeah.....
This is the book. The Beginner's Handbook of Amateur Radio, 4th Edition. I believe this is the right book.....
I use Mandrake on my box, and I too am a young ham (18).
Desktop is running Windows 98 (as default boot) and Lycoris 1.19 (Hardly ever use the desktop, unless I want to print something)
Laptop is running Mandrake 9.1 (as default boot) with Windows XP. I only use Windows for.... hmmm..... yeah.... that's about it....
And if I use XPde as my window manager and some version of WINE on Linux, I must be using windows, because I can run windows programs, and I see the ugly start menu? Yeah?
No, Mr. Proud Mac User. MacOSX is NOT unix. It's MacOSX with a unix-like shell. It uses a non-standard kernel, non-standard file system layout, a non-standard API, and a non-standard windowing system. There's a reason why the Open Group said Apple can't use the term 'UNIX' to describe OS X.
Oh and about OS X isn't UNIX...
From this article
The Open Group wants Apple to have Mac OS X undergo testing to certify that it complies with its standards for software bearing the Unix name; it also wants Apple to pay a fee. The Open Group says the costs to license the name are reasonable, based on the size of the company and the rough number of copies of the software Apple sells. In any case, no company is required to pay more than $110,000, said Graham Bird, vice president of marketing for The Open Group.
The only reason the Open Group won't give them their seal of approval is they want apple to pay.
No, people who program for Microsoft are 1337 mistake making humans. =p
Mod parent up!
If only they would create an update that would stop Gator from working... without stopping everything else...
I'm sorry, I'm not that old. How were the 200 elections? =p
I've really got to agree. They aren't going to play nice with OSS, especially after OSS has been named Microsoft's #2nd greatest enemy.
This is in a sense another vender lock-in. Making people use Windows to use MSN Messenger.
Before you jump down my throat, yes, they have a right to legally. Morally, I don't think they do, but that is just a matter of my opinion. I don't really like MSN Messanger, so I'm not complaining. I just emailed all my friends telling them to start using my new address and a different messenger if they want to contact me. I'm happy. I just wish we could get more people to switch.
So what's the big secret? That ultra cool routine that converts hex to binary? Hey, hey, hey! You better guard that industrial secret!
Sorry. I'm really not trying to make fun. I need to be in bed. Asleep. Instead of reading slashdot...
Why are OSes designed to be proprietary? If so, why not car engines too? They both are used to run their respective machines. Just because I can see the oil pan (well not right not, but anyway) doesn't mean I'll copy it. Granted it's a great deal easier in the digital world, but the most likely thing to come from the open-source is the fixing of problems and the adding of features.
Of course, they're both just philosophies. They are just as right as the other.
So you definately weren't reading the slashdot headlines earlier today were you? You know, the one that said Microsoft Worms Crash Ohio Nuke Plant, MD Trains. Noone died. But there was definately potential.
Uh, yeah. I think he was placing blame where it belongs. Part of the blame does rest on the sys admins. Part of the blame rests on the people that actually designed the software. "Placing the blame" is a joint venture between the users and the maker.
(Unless of course you go by the EULA, then Microsoft never did anything wrong.)
The reason most people don't complain about the Linux patches is most of the patches aren't for Linux. The great majority of patches are for third party programs.
Oh, one more major reason we complain about Windows more, is that we pay $99-$199 per copy of Windows, so we expect it to be working right. Linux gets a little more headway, because nobody has upgrade it. They do it for "The love of the game".
Think about the last week. Virus. Bad virus.
Do I really care how many different shades of blue they've mixed into their OS?
Mod parent up!
Most of your day is spent putting out fires. Fixing critical systems before all hell breaks loose
I worked on all the computers at my school, until I graduated. We had crappy computers made by a local company. They charged near $1200 per computer. Without monitor or keyboard. The county had a contract with them, so we couldn't buy from anyone else, no matter how much I campaigned. We kept them because "they have such good tech support." Right.... They showed up maybe once every two or three months. So from about the seventh grade, I was the computer repairman at school (until I graduated this spring).
Kinda funny. I was in class a fair ammount, so most of the time I never found out about anything until all hell had already broken loose... and the school secretary had already restarted the Novell server and Linux server without actually shutting them down....
Ah.... those were the good ole' days....
Thank goodness I've graduated!
Also, not knowing that there was a patch is unexcusable. Even if you don't install it, an administrator at least needs to know that the vulnerability exists.
It's true, for life or death forms of systems, they don't mind.... as long as you don't use any competitors' system. Then they get ready to lay the smack down....