When I was in high school, I ran my first BBS, originally on an Apple using Net-works (circa 1979), then later under TRSDOS I wrote my own custom BBS software.. it used to call me in the morning on the modem to wake me up to go to school. From there I went to the IBM PC when it became available and cycled through a bunch of software including various home-brew systems, then hooked into Fidonet and got into using echos (the predecessor to usenet).
Anyone remember Hell in NYC? The original hacker system?
How about Penn & Tellers early BBS? When you connected the first message you got was something like "click here to re-format your hard drive".
Big props to Wes Mier of Walnut Creek... one of the early major sources for great software, and a major distribution point for the shareware I wrote which ultimately ended up giving me a means by which I could support myself independently.
Too many people to thank or recognize... but it's great to know that the BBS days are not forgotten. I ran my BBS from 1979 until about 1990. Kids these days don't know how cool it used to be. It wasn't so easy in the early days to be "wired."
As a sysop of one of the oldest BBSes in the world, I spoke with Jason early on regarding the project. Unfortunately he wasn't able to make it down to interview me but I think it's great that this project has finally come to fruitition and wish him all the best. I also want to say Hey to everyone who hit the Dungeon BBS in the early days.
I'm sorry but your ignorant post pisses me off. If you want to be stupid and continue to propagate rumors that Al Core invented the Internet keep that tripe to your circle of small-minded sheep.
Your joke doesn't work because Al Gore never said he created, nor invented the Internet, but SCO has claimed they own portions of Unix.
Get your facts right before you embarass yourself on an International scale.
Ebert is just as much a whore as any other critic. Woody Allen could take a dump on a piece of cardboard and jam it into a DVD player and Ebert would give it "an enthusiastic thumbs up."
May I also remind you that Ebert gave A.I. 3 out of 4 stars. That movie has to be one of the biggest disasters in the history of cinema. He also gave all the Matrix movies high marks and one of the sequels higher marks than the original.
Ebert's a shill for a select segment of the industry. He doesn't matter any more as far as I'm concerned. He's another hollywood whore. He isn't worthy to be in Gene Siskel's shadow - whom I thought was the consumate critic.
It's not excessive in my opinion. Small fines are what nullified the effectiveness of many previous anti-spam, anti-virus laws.
There has to be a substantive risk on the part of the perpetrator to dissuade him from producing the spyware, and there also needs to be suitable incentive to pursue legal action. Small fines aren't worth anything because you can't find a lawyer who would take the case.
My employer at the time purchased a Lisa. It was a mess. This was supposed to revolutionize the PC world. It's funny how Apple sycophants leave out the Lisa, which was possibly without argument, the major failure that cost Apple its chance at market share in the PC industry. Then came the Mac later, which obviously was nowhere near as proprietary as the Lisa.
You make a good point and I agree with you. But in the early years of microcomputing, it was mostly businesses that purchased PCs, so while hobbyists were more dominant on Apples, choosing their selection based on available applications, other computers like the TRS-80 ended up selling more... but I also think this had a lot to do with distribution and availability. IBM had a national distribution network available that Apple didn't, and when their PC came out, the amount of third-party development that kicked into gear was exponentially greater than Apple at the time -- people saw that. So it was still the apps, but you are right.. there was a window of time where Apple defied that formula and didn't seem to profit from it... however, I think this is also about the time Apple tried to turn mafia and embraced more proprietary systems. Had the Lisa been an improvement of the Apple II instead of a complete proprietary redesign, things may have been different... But none of the Apple II software ran on the Lisa... *fatal mistake* and one that IBM didn't slip into, with the exception of the PC Jr., which was much ado about nothing.
Ultimately, nobody gives a damn what OS is running. Looking at the historical ups and downs of DOS in and of itself is a useless exercise in intellectual masturbation.
People buy computers because of applications, not operating systems. Although Microsoft has managed to turn the OS into the application, the best, most solid systems respect the separation of OS and application. The only thing worthy of analysis relative to all this is the fact that MS's bloating up of DOS with a GUI and bundled apps ended up delivering them market share. But ultimately nobody ever chose a PC based on the OS... never, ever. They may have chosen a PC/OS based on the applications available for the OS, but with the exception of just a few, most computer users don't care what's under the hood as long as it gets them from point A to point B.
That's the way it was, is, and always will be. This holds true for everything from cell phones to console gaming. The system with the most versatility and functionality will win out in the absence of any domineering marketing campaign (which has a tendency of nullifying objectivity).
1. DOS was stable.
2. Because DOS was stable, developers were more comfortable developing applications for it.
3. Because there were more applications available for DOS, it garnered market share.
#2 is the key to it all... Had the first IBM PC been more closed like the Macintosh, the whole industry may have evolved differently. Had the TRS-80 been easier to hack and upgrade, we'd all probably be using TRSDOS v900. Had Apple not decided to turn their backs on the great original idea of embracing third party development when they went the route of Mac/Lisa, we'd all probably be using Apples. It's all about the applications, and how those who develop systems pander to the widest array of appdev talent.
What's funny is what's happened to the software development industry. I'd bet even today, 10+ years after the demise of DOS as a viable platform, there are still more DOS apps than Windows apps. So MS's pie-in-the-sky-OS idea has hurt the industry as a whole by crippling independent software development. That's what we can learn from this whole mess.
I believe most people propagating "impending market domination hype" relative to Unix variants aren't even major users of the OS. Those of us whose livlihood depends upon *solid*, *secure* computing performance actually don't give a darn whether Unix becomes universally accepted -- as long as we can use it for ourselves.
In fact, if I had my way, I'd prefer all my competitors use Windows-based systems. It would give me a major competitive advantage. On the Internet, nobody cares what OS the server you're connecting to is running as long as it performs. And along those lines, Unix servers outperform Windows-based systems exponentially in every category. The only time this would ever be a problem is if I charged by the hour for maintenance and support -- then I can see Windows systems being more appealing. Ultimately, I don't care if Linux wins the desktop war. The best bands don't have #1 records. Since when has the mainstream majority ever been a good judge of character?
I will not be attending this movie in theatres. I'll borrow the DVD from my nutball SW fans. This is my way of refusing to subsidize the formulaic, sequel-driven, lemming-like marketing plan of the studios, the obnoxious mega-marketing of every star wars-branded dingleberry on the planet, and the generally sorry state of bank-account-moviemaking.
I understand some people live in this dream star wars universe and have to see it. But I'd urge others to take the time they'd spend on this institutionalized marketing scheme and go see a small, independent movie.
If the Star Wars franchise were software, it would be another buggy version of Windows.
I forgot to mention, this company needed me to do alot of things. I understood the best how their databases and servers aligned with their business processes. Alot of people said that the company needed me more than I needed them. Oh well, I quit, not my problem.
They're still making those Star Wars movies? Haven't they learned anything from the plethora of other once-noble franchises that were summarily beat into a bloody pulp of mediocrity? I guess not. But the funniest thing are the throngs of "fans" who buy anything and everything Star Wars.
I have a friend who came over the other day with a zip lock bag of M&Ms. Apparently they produced a bag with some Star Wars crap on it and he had to buy it; the week before it was pop tarts and frosted mini wheats. Please people, get a grip. It's just a movie, and with the exception of the first one, a series of ever-increasing crappy ones.
Like most people, I loved the original Star Wars. I collected all the comic books and enjoyed it, but the series has been milked and destroyed. It's a shame.
When I first saw TechTV, I was very impressed. I especially like how one of the policies that Leo implemented on TSS was to go live and if the computer crashed, show it on TV, and using Windows, many times their OS would crash in the middle of demos. They felt it was important to let people know that this happens to everybody and not just neophytes, and that ideally it should be avoidable and that was their way of sending a message to the software developers that if their products weren't stable, at least TSS wouldn't cover it up.
One problem these days with product reviews is that the line between editorial and advertising is to narrow, you don't know who to trust. TSS and some of the other shows on the early TechTV were very good about calling attention to products that, well, sucked and didn't live up to their claims. This probably alienated potential advertisers but it generated hardcore loyalty among viewers like me who felt that many of the personalities on TechTV were honorable and trustworthy.
When the network started running all kinds of weird fluff/syndicated crap, things started to decline. More emphasis was put on gaming and less on technology, more on goofy gadgets and less on core applications and utilities. When G4 took over the network, it was nearly dead and I haven't watched since.
I agree with others that Leo has a good personality for television, but sometimes I felt he was a little too animated and "fatherly". In contrast, Patrick and Kevin and others were more peer-like in the manner in which they presented information and news. Leo had more of a slightly patronizing hyper-exagerated-enthusiasm that I felt was over the top and annoying at times. But I can't deny that he was very knowledgable and capable. I would love to see the old crew back together again.
How do you handle these 3rd-party security people who make mountains out of every molehill?"
Since you don't cite any examples of these issues, I would bet you're one of these people who think running PHP with register_globals on is a "molehill?"
Cite some examples, or else this looks like you're complaining that tightening security holes would be/whine "hard work." Well, it'll be harder after some n00b takes my personal information off your insecure system. Fix it, or consider changing careers instead of being yet another BOFH.
Thanks for the info... I've been looking at portsentry. Is there any sample info available for demonstrating how to integrate this into hosts.allow?
One issue is that I've already mass-blocked most of the offending foreign IP space in hosts.allow, but this doesn't stop them from consuming inetd resources while probing. In some cases I have router access, and on other servers I don't, so I can't always count on using hardware firewalls.
This is one reason why i ultimately think that the future of computer security is more of a political/jurisdictional issue than a technological one. They will come up with new probes, and we will come up with new solutions and we keep going around in circles until the backbone providers agree to hold networks that harbor these criminals responsible.
I think that the top level backbones should offer the option of filtering large chunks of rogue IP space. I think most of China and Korea should just be stripped at the backbone level. This would cut spam and hacking activity in half. As a customer of Worldcom and Sprint and other providers, I'd like to see them offer top-level filtering of source IP traffic before its even metered on my networks.
This brings us to an issue I've wondered about for a long, long time.
Where are the detailed IP databases? Who is compiling them? (You know some intelligence and other agencies are surely generating these database, but are there any that are public other than the search engines?)
Google would be great if you could put in an IP and get a list of all the things that IP searched on. Imagine the possibilities in tracking people down. Yes, a huge security issue, but you know it's being done. A few select corporations and government agencies probably have the means to profile IP addresses. It's just a matter of time before this information is more widely accessible in an organized format.
One thing that really bothers me are things like this in my logs:
Mar 2 22:42:37 inetd[32684]: refused connection from 210.29.1.3, service sshd (tcp) Mar 2 22:42:38 inetd[1534]: ssh from 210.29.1.3 exceeded counts/min (limit 1/min) Mar 2 22:43:09 last message repeated 38 times Mar 2 22:45:09 last message repeated 114 times Mar 2 22:55:10 last message repeated 644 times Mar 2 23:05:10 last message repeated 509 times
I routinely run into foreign systems hitting my server at extraordinary rates. These seem to be bursts here and there, more looking to probe the system than DoS it but sometimes a DoS condition occurrs.
I routinely to an IPWHOIS of these locales and send e-mail to the IP administrators, but some of the foreign ones are unresponsive. So what can you do?
Are there any scripts out there that can automate the process of reporting system probes?
Is there any recourse in taking aggressive counteraction against, for example, the hoards of chinese IPs that routinely probe and attack domestic hosts?
You claim software is more complex. I agree. I don't necessarily feel that it's any "better" by any stretch of the imagination.
It was very rare when my TRS-80 crashed. Today Windows users deal with crashes on a daily basis. That's an improvement? That's the result of complexity? That's a bullshit excuse if you ask me.
Computers have more things to manage which necessitates more processing power? Yes, but are people necessarily any more productive, or is the evolution of technology merely trying to keep pace with the languid state of software and application development?
There have always been applications that required advanced processing, but when your average computer user has the power of a million ENIACs and is only slightly more productive than he would be without a computer whatsoever, that's sad, and there are a lot of people like that. Yes, a computer allows you to do more, faster, but I contend it's not usually better.
Technology used to be a tool, now it's a crutch. Yes a crutch can also be considered a tool, but not a very respectable one IMO.
Slashdot Mirror
When I was in high school, I ran my first BBS, originally on an Apple using Net-works (circa 1979), then later under TRSDOS I wrote my own custom BBS software.. it used to call me in the morning on the modem to wake me up to go to school. From there I went to the IBM PC when it became available and cycled through a bunch of software including various home-brew systems, then hooked into Fidonet and got into using echos (the predecessor to usenet).
Anyone remember Hell in NYC? The original hacker system?
How about Penn & Tellers early BBS? When you connected the first message you got was something like "click here to re-format your hard drive".
Big props to Wes Mier of Walnut Creek... one of the early major sources for great software, and a major distribution point for the shareware I wrote which ultimately ended up giving me a means by which I could support myself independently.
Too many people to thank or recognize... but it's great to know that the BBS days are not forgotten. I ran my BBS from 1979 until about 1990. Kids these days don't know how cool it used to be. It wasn't so easy in the early days to be "wired."
As a sysop of one of the oldest BBSes in the world, I spoke with Jason early on regarding the project. Unfortunately he wasn't able to make it down to interview me but I think it's great that this project has finally come to fruitition and wish him all the best. I also want to say Hey to everyone who hit the Dungeon BBS in the early days.
I may be a stereotypical slashdot asshole. That remains to be seen.
In any case, I'll be working at Kerrville, so let me know if you want to have coffee (or in my case, decaf - LOL)
Go look up the word "initiative" texan.
I know that's too many syllables and it makes your brain hurt, but give it a try anyway.
Also, it's ironic you criticize me for a typo, when you obviously don't have a solid understanding of the English language.
Sorry, I have a low tolerance for brain dead, partisian political propaganda.
PS. I love the way rather than acknowledge that you're spreading misinformation, you just admit you're from Texas. Point taken.
I'm sorry but your ignorant post pisses me off. If you want to be stupid and continue to propagate rumors that Al Core invented the Internet keep that tripe to your circle of small-minded sheep.
Your joke doesn't work because Al Gore never said he created, nor invented the Internet, but SCO has claimed they own portions of Unix.
Get your facts right before you embarass yourself on an International scale.
Ebert is just as much a whore as any other critic. Woody Allen could take a dump on a piece of cardboard and jam it into a DVD player and Ebert would give it "an enthusiastic thumbs up."
May I also remind you that Ebert gave A.I. 3 out of 4 stars. That movie has to be one of the biggest disasters in the history of cinema. He also gave all the Matrix movies high marks and one of the sequels higher marks than the original.
Ebert's a shill for a select segment of the industry. He doesn't matter any more as far as I'm concerned. He's another hollywood whore. He isn't worthy to be in Gene Siskel's shadow - whom I thought was the consumate critic.
It's not excessive in my opinion. Small fines are what nullified the effectiveness of many previous anti-spam, anti-virus laws.
There has to be a substantive risk on the part of the perpetrator to dissuade him from producing the spyware, and there also needs to be suitable incentive to pursue legal action. Small fines aren't worth anything because you can't find a lawyer who would take the case.
My employer at the time purchased a Lisa. It was a mess. This was supposed to revolutionize the PC world. It's funny how Apple sycophants leave out the Lisa, which was possibly without argument, the major failure that cost Apple its chance at market share in the PC industry. Then came the Mac later, which obviously was nowhere near as proprietary as the Lisa.
You make a good point and I agree with you. But in the early years of microcomputing, it was mostly businesses that purchased PCs, so while hobbyists were more dominant on Apples, choosing their selection based on available applications, other computers like the TRS-80 ended up selling more... but I also think this had a lot to do with distribution and availability. IBM had a national distribution network available that Apple didn't, and when their PC came out, the amount of third-party development that kicked into gear was exponentially greater than Apple at the time -- people saw that. So it was still the apps, but you are right.. there was a window of time where Apple defied that formula and didn't seem to profit from it... however, I think this is also about the time Apple tried to turn mafia and embraced more proprietary systems. Had the Lisa been an improvement of the Apple II instead of a complete proprietary redesign, things may have been different... But none of the Apple II software ran on the Lisa... *fatal mistake* and one that IBM didn't slip into, with the exception of the PC Jr., which was much ado about nothing.
Windows is not an OS. It's an application that, like a parasite, has leeched itself onto DOS.
Ultimately, nobody gives a damn what OS is running. Looking at the historical ups and downs of DOS in and of itself is a useless exercise in intellectual masturbation.
People buy computers because of applications, not operating systems. Although Microsoft has managed to turn the OS into the application, the best, most solid systems respect the separation of OS and application. The only thing worthy of analysis relative to all this is the fact that MS's bloating up of DOS with a GUI and bundled apps ended up delivering them market share. But ultimately nobody ever chose a PC based on the OS... never, ever. They may have chosen a PC/OS based on the applications available for the OS, but with the exception of just a few, most computer users don't care what's under the hood as long as it gets them from point A to point B.
That's the way it was, is, and always will be. This holds true for everything from cell phones to console gaming. The system with the most versatility and functionality will win out in the absence of any domineering marketing campaign (which has a tendency of nullifying objectivity).
1. DOS was stable.
2. Because DOS was stable, developers were more comfortable developing applications for it.
3. Because there were more applications available for DOS, it garnered market share.
#2 is the key to it all... Had the first IBM PC been more closed like the Macintosh, the whole industry may have evolved differently. Had the TRS-80 been easier to hack and upgrade, we'd all probably be using TRSDOS v900. Had Apple not decided to turn their backs on the great original idea of embracing third party development when they went the route of Mac/Lisa, we'd all probably be using Apples. It's all about the applications, and how those who develop systems pander to the widest array of appdev talent.
What's funny is what's happened to the software development industry. I'd bet even today, 10+ years after the demise of DOS as a viable platform, there are still more DOS apps than Windows apps. So MS's pie-in-the-sky-OS idea has hurt the industry as a whole by crippling independent software development. That's what we can learn from this whole mess.
I couldn't agree with you more.
I believe most people propagating "impending market domination hype" relative to Unix variants aren't even major users of the OS. Those of us whose livlihood depends upon *solid*, *secure* computing performance actually don't give a darn whether Unix becomes universally accepted -- as long as we can use it for ourselves.
In fact, if I had my way, I'd prefer all my competitors use Windows-based systems. It would give me a major competitive advantage. On the Internet, nobody cares what OS the server you're connecting to is running as long as it performs. And along those lines, Unix servers outperform Windows-based systems exponentially in every category. The only time this would ever be a problem is if I charged by the hour for maintenance and support -- then I can see Windows systems being more appealing. Ultimately, I don't care if Linux wins the desktop war. The best bands don't have #1 records. Since when has the mainstream majority ever been a good judge of character?
I don't know what the fuss is about. It's not like Star Wars merchandising has gotten out of hand.
I will not be attending this movie in theatres. I'll borrow the DVD from my nutball SW fans. This is my way of refusing to subsidize the formulaic, sequel-driven, lemming-like marketing plan of the studios, the obnoxious mega-marketing of every star wars-branded dingleberry on the planet, and the generally sorry state of bank-account-moviemaking.
I understand some people live in this dream star wars universe and have to see it. But I'd urge others to take the time they'd spend on this institutionalized marketing scheme and go see a small, independent movie.
If the Star Wars franchise were software, it would be another buggy version of Windows.
I forgot to mention, this company needed me to do alot of things. I understood the best how their databases and servers aligned with their business processes. Alot of people said that the company needed me more than I needed them. Oh well, I quit, not my problem.
Your new boss sounds like a real asshole.
They're still making those Star Wars movies? Haven't they learned anything from the plethora of other once-noble franchises that were summarily beat into a bloody pulp of mediocrity? I guess not. But the funniest thing are the throngs of "fans" who buy anything and everything Star Wars.
I have a friend who came over the other day with a zip lock bag of M&Ms. Apparently they produced a bag with some Star Wars crap on it and he had to buy it; the week before it was pop tarts and frosted mini wheats. Please people, get a grip. It's just a movie, and with the exception of the first one, a series of ever-increasing crappy ones.
Like most people, I loved the original Star Wars. I collected all the comic books and enjoyed it, but the series has been milked and destroyed. It's a shame.
Theft implies product being stolen from its rightful owners. That remains to be seen!
When I first saw TechTV, I was very impressed. I especially like how one of the policies that Leo implemented on TSS was to go live and if the computer crashed, show it on TV, and using Windows, many times their OS would crash in the middle of demos. They felt it was important to let people know that this happens to everybody and not just neophytes, and that ideally it should be avoidable and that was their way of sending a message to the software developers that if their products weren't stable, at least TSS wouldn't cover it up.
One problem these days with product reviews is that the line between editorial and advertising is to narrow, you don't know who to trust. TSS and some of the other shows on the early TechTV were very good about calling attention to products that, well, sucked and didn't live up to their claims. This probably alienated potential advertisers but it generated hardcore loyalty among viewers like me who felt that many of the personalities on TechTV were honorable and trustworthy.
When the network started running all kinds of weird fluff/syndicated crap, things started to decline. More emphasis was put on gaming and less on technology, more on goofy gadgets and less on core applications and utilities. When G4 took over the network, it was nearly dead and I haven't watched since.
I agree with others that Leo has a good personality for television, but sometimes I felt he was a little too animated and "fatherly". In contrast, Patrick and Kevin and others were more peer-like in the manner in which they presented information and news. Leo had more of a slightly patronizing hyper-exagerated-enthusiasm that I felt was over the top and annoying at times. But I can't deny that he was very knowledgable and capable. I would love to see the old crew back together again.
1:40 for the torrent. That's not worth complaining about. I guess by now a lot of people have it open.
How do you handle these 3rd-party security people who make mountains out of every molehill?"
/whine "hard work." Well, it'll be harder after some n00b takes my personal information off your insecure system. Fix it, or consider changing careers instead of being yet another BOFH.
Since you don't cite any examples of these issues, I would bet you're one of these people who think running PHP with register_globals on is a "molehill?"
Cite some examples, or else this looks like you're complaining that tightening security holes would be
Thanks for the info... I've been looking at portsentry. Is there any sample info available for demonstrating how to integrate this into hosts.allow?
One issue is that I've already mass-blocked most of the offending foreign IP space in hosts.allow, but this doesn't stop them from consuming inetd resources while probing. In some cases I have router access, and on other servers I don't, so I can't always count on using hardware firewalls.
This is one reason why i ultimately think that the future of computer security is more of a political/jurisdictional issue than a technological one. They will come up with new probes, and we will come up with new solutions and we keep going around in circles until the backbone providers agree to hold networks that harbor these criminals responsible.
I think that the top level backbones should offer the option of filtering large chunks of rogue IP space. I think most of China and Korea should just be stripped at the backbone level. This would cut spam and hacking activity in half. As a customer of Worldcom and Sprint and other providers, I'd like to see them offer top-level filtering of source IP traffic before its even metered on my networks.
This brings us to an issue I've wondered about for a long, long time.
Where are the detailed IP databases? Who is compiling them? (You know some intelligence and other agencies are surely generating these database, but are there any that are public other than the search engines?)
Google would be great if you could put in an IP and get a list of all the things that IP searched on. Imagine the possibilities in tracking people down. Yes, a huge security issue, but you know it's being done. A few select corporations and government agencies probably have the means to profile IP addresses. It's just a matter of time before this information is more widely accessible in an organized format.
One thing that really bothers me are things like this in my logs:
Mar 2 22:42:37 inetd[32684]: refused connection from 210.29.1.3, service sshd (tcp)
Mar 2 22:42:38 inetd[1534]: ssh from 210.29.1.3 exceeded counts/min (limit 1/min)
Mar 2 22:43:09 last message repeated 38 times
Mar 2 22:45:09 last message repeated 114 times
Mar 2 22:55:10 last message repeated 644 times
Mar 2 23:05:10 last message repeated 509 times
I routinely run into foreign systems hitting my server at extraordinary rates. These seem to be bursts here and there, more looking to probe the system than DoS it but sometimes a DoS condition occurrs.
I routinely to an IPWHOIS of these locales and send e-mail to the IP administrators, but some of the foreign ones are unresponsive. So what can you do?
Are there any scripts out there that can automate the process of reporting system probes?
Is there any recourse in taking aggressive counteraction against, for example, the hoards of chinese IPs that routinely probe and attack domestic hosts?
Your point justifies my point.
You claim software is more complex. I agree. I don't necessarily feel that it's any "better" by any stretch of the imagination.
It was very rare when my TRS-80 crashed. Today Windows users deal with crashes on a daily basis. That's an improvement? That's the result of complexity? That's a bullshit excuse if you ask me.
Computers have more things to manage which necessitates more processing power? Yes, but are people necessarily any more productive, or is the evolution of technology merely trying to keep pace with the languid state of software and application development?
There have always been applications that required advanced processing, but when your average computer user has the power of a million ENIACs and is only slightly more productive than he would be without a computer whatsoever, that's sad, and there are a lot of people like that. Yes, a computer allows you to do more, faster, but I contend it's not usually better.
Technology used to be a tool, now it's a crutch. Yes a crutch can also be considered a tool, but not a very respectable one IMO.