>>>Windows is insecure. We know this. Partly it is the result of the operating system and partly it is the result of bad applications. And Microsoft knows it too.
What exactly is the "Operating System" ? There's soo many pieces that interoperate on MS OS'es that you're unsure what does what. In better managed OSes, I can see what does what, and how it communicates between kernel and user space.
>>>This is why Microsoft is making the bold move of promoting managed langages like C# and VB.net, and a fully managed runtime in the guise of.net. This is a huge, huge step toward eliminating buffer overruns and other trivial errors. Tens of thousands of developers are making the move right now. Any bookstore has at least 50 books on.net technologies.
Trivial erors, yes. What about:
1: Errors in the runtime environment that result to overflows 2: Mis-documented libraries 3: Calls made to 'hidden libs' that result to runtime crashing/burning 4: Yet another lib download to run "those" programs (thinking of VB RT's)
>>>In short, laugh about it now, let it distract you from what's coming, let it lull you into thinking Linux will always have the security edge, go right ahead. It won't change anything.
Linux IS secure because we can see how it works. The.net VM may work, but will it even have 1/2 of the security features that a basic environment in Linux has?
I'm still waiting for a jail() or a chroot() on Windows...
The SkyOS team is accused of making the GNU tools for their system WITHOUT providing FSF with patches for compilation.
Figuring how SkyOS is made for public dissemination (anybody can download/install it), they're breaking the GPL.
As for references, there's a stir on the SkyOS message boards occaisionally, but the admins delete them. I'm pretty sure they're listed also with the FSF as GPL breakers too....
1: Eats at GPL programs and does not follow GPL 2: Has no source to examine 3: No "Open Source" type license 4: Pissy developers when you mention Open Source
>>>So now Red Hat is using the tired and cliche approach of getting PR by hosting a cracker contest.
And what's wrong with that?
>>>You would think that they'd have learned from previous examples. Just because a system hasn't been defeated in a cracker contest doesn't mean its secure.
Corrent, but it goes to try to prove the Monkey-Typewriter theory. If there's a problem in the policies/exploit somone's bound to catch it sometime. However, you can log all CURRENT exploits found in that and try to create a secure base.
>>>Security is a process not something you can shrinkwrap. The proper way to demonstrate the security of a product is through repeated, thorough code audits like some other software distributions are doing.
How is Fedora's code NOT being put through repeated code audits? Any time any developer on that project finds a problem in their own section ( or in th whole), they usually submit a bug patch to fix the unwanted action.
>>>Things must be looking dire indeed for Redhat if they're starting to make announcements of products like this ala another company we know and love.
What's wrong with demo machines? I sure wouldnt buy a product you cant demo first.
Anyways, what do you know. You're an anonymous coward....
>>>This is a lot like saying you don't understand Pythagoras' theorem and then going on to say it's crap.
I wouldnt go to say that Pythagoras' theorem is "crap", but it IS incomplete. It should be taught the complete theorem that discerns the sides AND angles on any triangle (euclidian, of course).
>>>>I think the riaa, miaa, mipa, etc should go after the real source of free information, your local/school/etc library. with all this free information on the loose, its a direct threat to our capitalist lifestyles and way of life.
Libraries have been around for thousands of years. That little thing called precident kinda puts water on that book burning thing..
Still I can think of some great pictures, MPAA logo with a translucent swastika in burning red characters....
>>>God damn, if I hear one more of you go, "this is just security through obscurity!" I am going to puke. This is the same as cleartext passwords, which are pretty secure if (a) you know nobody is sniffing the network and (b) you know nobody is masquerading as the host you want to connect to.
So you shouldnt use them on the net since neither 1 or 2 is guaranteed.
>>>Of course those things aren't typically true, so this alone isn't very secure. But it does disguise your exchange which, contrary to what the security-through-obscurity folks are saying, does give you some small measure of security.
If this mechanism gives you a telnet shell of root, you're doing something wrong. If it's used to send a packet containing a hash of your shared secret and your username to enable ssh to 1 IP for 1 user, that'd be superior.
Then you've never heard of the Nuclear Ramjet? It's the same idea, but with fission powering the thing. They were able to make 1 back in the 70's (Cold War era), but then decided it's too dangerous to the troops.
And to add to that, I've got that Dell card to accept the HostAP driver;-)
It also seems to be a bit stronger strength than the standard Orinoco cards too... I can get a 1 Mbit strength through a 3 feet stone/concrete wall (or 2x the distance around the hallway). The other cards I have cant do that..
You were stupid for doing that.. If you cant see past a scam of "Pay your own training", you deserved it.
When I was looking for any type of job, I was pulled in by a 3'rd party for a car dealership for sales (which OPERATED the classes at the dealership). Second day is when they told you the 'cost' of a low low 599$. 10 people did pay the money (I didnt, told them to shove this class up theirs). Nobody got a job at the car dealership as sales.
Re:Why, exactly, the *fear* of China?
on
The Future of NASA
·
· Score: 1
Yeah, bt if there's a war with the Chinese, they're kinda easy to spot.
Re:One thing I dislike about Linux community
on
BSD For Linux Users
·
· Score: 1
>>>I see the people trying to either be funny or karma whoring state: Well if he can show me a freeBSD server that can survive a/.ing...and I have to ask, "How many sites are taken down a week by slashdotting running Linux?" Hell I know our little 2.Ghz Xeon box with 1GB of Ram wouldn't survive no matter what OS we had on there, it is Linux btw.
Simple enough. Sue Slashdot for the WILLFUL attempt and success of a Denial of Service attack. I'm sure OSDN has a stash of money to pay victims of a slashdotting. and if they dont....
Slashdot Mirror
>>>Windows is insecure. We know this. Partly it is the result of the operating system and partly it is the result of bad applications. And Microsoft knows it too.
.net. This is a huge, huge step toward eliminating buffer overruns and other trivial errors. Tens of thousands of developers are making the move right now. Any bookstore has at least 50 books on .net technologies.
.net VM may work, but will it even have 1/2 of the security features that a basic environment in Linux has?
What exactly is the "Operating System" ? There's soo many pieces that interoperate on MS OS'es that you're unsure what does what. In better managed OSes, I can see what does what, and how it communicates between kernel and user space.
>>>This is why Microsoft is making the bold move of promoting managed langages like C# and VB.net, and a fully managed runtime in the guise of
Trivial erors, yes. What about:
1: Errors in the runtime environment that result to overflows
2: Mis-documented libraries
3: Calls made to 'hidden libs' that result to runtime crashing/burning
4: Yet another lib download to run "those" programs (thinking of VB RT's)
>>>In short, laugh about it now, let it distract you from what's coming, let it lull you into thinking Linux will always have the security edge, go right ahead. It won't change anything.
Linux IS secure because we can see how it works. The
I'm still waiting for a jail() or a chroot() on Windows...
Yes, and if it wasnt for the mass-murder of the Jews, we probably wouldnt have intervened in the European problems.
We wouldnt be at this time if it wasnt for WW2 and the ills it brought..
The SkyOS team is accused of making the GNU tools for their system WITHOUT providing FSF with patches for compilation.
Figuring how SkyOS is made for public dissemination (anybody can download/install it), they're breaking the GPL.
As for references, there's a stir on the SkyOS message boards occaisionally, but the admins delete them. I'm pretty sure they're listed also with the FSF as GPL breakers too....
Something that...
1: Eats at GPL programs and does not follow GPL
2: Has no source to examine
3: No "Open Source" type license
4: Pissy developers when you mention Open Source
Real free. Want speech with that?
Off topic, I know.. But I see a star next to yoru name.
Did the crew make you pay for subscription? If they did, it's as bad as the college I went to. They made prof's pay student rates for parking places.
No no.. That would be "Rigor Mortis Tortoise"
Where in the hell you live? Saudi Arabia?
>>>So now Red Hat is using the tired and cliche approach of getting PR by hosting a cracker contest.
And what's wrong with that?
>>>You would think that they'd have learned from previous examples. Just because a system hasn't been defeated in a cracker contest doesn't mean its secure.
Corrent, but it goes to try to prove the Monkey-Typewriter theory. If there's a problem in the policies/exploit somone's bound to catch it sometime. However, you can log all CURRENT exploits found in that and try to create a secure base.
>>>Security is a process not something you can shrinkwrap. The proper way to demonstrate the security of a product is through repeated, thorough code audits like some other software distributions are doing.
How is Fedora's code NOT being put through repeated code audits? Any time any developer on that project finds a problem in their own section ( or in th whole), they usually submit a bug patch to fix the unwanted action.
>>>Things must be looking dire indeed for Redhat if they're starting to make announcements of products like this ala another company we know and love.
What's wrong with demo machines? I sure wouldnt buy a product you cant demo first.
Anyways, what do you know. You're an anonymous coward....
Fleshlight when the SO is away?
Yeah.. At the computer, eh? What for, so he can play EverWOW!!!
Like secretary shorthand?
"Hlo. mname john. UR good. Go4 lunch 2morro ?"
I'd cringe if I had to read that "compressed" crap.
>>>This is a lot like saying you don't understand Pythagoras' theorem and then going on to say it's crap.
I wouldnt go to say that Pythagoras' theorem is "crap", but it IS incomplete. It should be taught the complete theorem that discerns the sides AND angles on any triangle (euclidian, of course).
>>>>I think the riaa, miaa, mipa, etc should go after the real source of free information, your local/school/etc library. with all this free information on the loose, its a direct threat to our capitalist lifestyles and way of life.
Libraries have been around for thousands of years. That little thing called precident kinda puts water on that book burning thing..
Still I can think of some great pictures, MPAA logo with a translucent swastika in burning red characters....
>>>>Copyright protects expression not content. You most certainly own the CD you bought, but you do not own the content on it. There is a difference.
You're saying that the 'industry' owns the little bumps? But isnt the bumps part of that CD?
If I didnt have my trusty emacs manual around here, I'd belived you..
>>>God damn, if I hear one more of you go, "this is just security through obscurity!" I am going to puke. This is the same as cleartext passwords, which are pretty secure if (a) you know nobody is sniffing the network and (b) you know nobody is masquerading as the host you want to connect to.
So you shouldnt use them on the net since neither 1 or 2 is guaranteed.
>>>Of course those things aren't typically true, so this alone isn't very secure. But it does disguise your exchange which, contrary to what the security-through-obscurity folks are saying, does give you some small measure of security.
If this mechanism gives you a telnet shell of root, you're doing something wrong. If it's used to send a packet containing a hash of your shared secret and your username to enable ssh to 1 IP for 1 user, that'd be superior.
"far-fringe-right-wing lunatics" eh? It was your dumbass president clinton that signed in the DMCA.
Really, any lunatic is a bad lunatic whether that be left, right or anything.
I think women, when left to their own devices, will find something..
Then you've never heard of the Nuclear Ramjet? It's the same idea, but with fission powering the thing. They were able to make 1 back in the 70's (Cold War era), but then decided it's too dangerous to the troops.
And to add to that, I've got that Dell card to accept the HostAP driver ;-)
It also seems to be a bit stronger strength than the standard Orinoco cards too... I can get a 1 Mbit strength through a 3 feet stone/concrete wall (or 2x the distance around the hallway). The other cards I have cant do that..
And knowing how glib you say this, you probably have no girlfriend either..
Guess what: Personality matters just as much as looks.
You were stupid for doing that.. If you cant see past a scam of "Pay your own training", you deserved it.
When I was looking for any type of job, I was pulled in by a 3'rd party for a car dealership for sales (which OPERATED the classes at the dealership). Second day is when they told you the 'cost' of a low low 599$. 10 people did pay the money (I didnt, told them to shove this class up theirs). Nobody got a job at the car dealership as sales.
Nope... That was Lexx
Yeah, bt if there's a war with the Chinese, they're kinda easy to spot.
>>>I see the people trying to either be funny or karma whoring state: Well if he can show me a freeBSD server that can survive a /.ing...and I have to ask, "How many sites are taken down a week by slashdotting running Linux?" Hell I know our little 2.Ghz Xeon box with 1GB of Ram wouldn't survive no matter what OS we had on there, it is Linux btw.
Simple enough. Sue Slashdot for the WILLFUL attempt and success of a Denial of Service attack. I'm sure OSDN has a stash of money to pay victims of a slashdotting. and if they dont....