So are you implying that running an unpatched Linux box is safe, because the prev poster, Mr. Mandriva, didn't mention that he patched his system, yet you didn't put your comment there?
Install Ubuntu 6.06LTS or another from that era and let's see how many patches there are, shall we? Not to mention that everyone has encountered patches that refuse to install in Linux as well.
What does all this mean? Linux users incessantly bash windows.
What does all this mean? You have got a fucking chip on your shoulder.
I never said that an unpatched Linux box is safe. Please show me where I said that.
The parent I was replying to was essentially saying that you just put in the Windows CD, play Xbox for a while, and then you are "done". I was just pointing out that no, you are not done at that point, you then have to patch the system, and in my recent experience that is not hassle-free.
In the last week I've done both Debian and XP installs.
When I installed Debian via netinstall, it was up to date and fully patched at the end of the install.
When I installed XP via CD (no netinstall available), the system was not patched and I experienced difficulty in getting it to patch correctly.
Like I said (not implied, but explicitly stated), YMMV.
tracking border crossers in real time, sites dedicated to assembling satellite photos of crimes in progress
I think you've watched Enemy of the State maybe one too many times.
Surveillance satellites are not geo-synchronous, so they cannot observe in what most of us consider real-time. "Real-time" surveillance is not like watching a color movie of what's going on on the ground. It is more like analyzing black and white snapshots of what is on the ground as the satellite(s) pass over a given area.
Doing effective analysis requires a lot of resources, knowledge and experience that the typical person just doesn't have.
Now what did it take to get the same functionality in Windows on the same desktop? Put in Windows CD 1 and select a few settings. Play Xbox. Put in CD 2. Play more Xbox. Done.
So you run an unpatched system? That doesn't sound very smart.
The base install of Windows is easy. The updates and patches (XP needs > 60) take much longer than the original install. If they will install at all (currently wrestling with the refusal of an XP system to apply the BITS update!).
Because it couldn't be consumers demanding faster, better systems in order to, say, play newer games and HD movies?
Yes most businesses really need the gaming and HD movie performance.
Individuals aren't the area where uptake is slow, MS's problem is with the corporate/government customers.
Vista runs like shit on a 1 GHz machine with 512MB of RAM, compared to XP.
Corporate IT aren't going to waste their money on unnecessary hardware upgrades just to get the newest/shiniest. There has to be some sort of payoff, or else they are going to wait until life-cycle replacements get the hardware to the point where it can run Vista as well as their current systems run XP.
I remember two reasons. One, it broke DBaseIII+ applications, which were widespread at the time. Two, it took up more of the precious 640KB conventional memory than DOS 3.11 used, so a lot of TSR stuff broke.
MS didn't have the long history of fucking over its customers then that it does now, so the PHB-types tended to take it out on the techs when their favorite productivity app suddenly stopped working.
That was the first in the long series of support nightmares that MS inflicted on us poor techs.
13. UPGRADES. To use upgrade software, you must first be licensed for the software that is eligible for the upgrade. Upon upgrade, this agreement takes the place of the agreement for the software you upgraded from. After you upgrade, you may no longer use the software you upgraded from.
Can you explain how this says exactly the opposite of what you're saying it says?
My reading of this is that once you upgrade, you are not allowed to run both the original version and the upgraded version.
This has nothing to do with being licensed for Vista, but running XP instead. What it forbids is upgrading to Vista, and then using the original XP license on another machine.
Despite all of their other faults, the old IBM PS/2 series computers were great for this. You could strip them to the bone with your fingers and a quarter.
The long and short of it is, leaking classified info is a crime. See Valerie Plame case.
Ultimately it was decided that no crime took place
OK, so leaking classified information is a crime (ref: Valerie Plame), but "it was decided" that no crime took place in that case.
That's how investigations go!
So the information leaked itself? No, Richard Armitage admits he leaked the information. You state that leaking classified info is a crime. But there's no crime in that case because...?
to me it's easier to see/find stuff then when I have to scroll for miles through the config files on my apache servers
Not a very convincing argument.
First, text editors have this really nifty feature called "search". Takes you right to the string that you request.
Second, what if I want to see/verify all settings? What if I want to make sure that Server B is configured exactly the same as Server A? Much easier to scroll through (or diff) a config file than to click on every single frigging tab and subdialog, remembering which ones I have looked at and what they were set to.
Yes, to each his own, but anyone who has done anything beyond setting up a single web server once, curses the MS GUI configuration interfaces.
Based on my experience with MS products, GUIs make really shitty configuration interfaces. You have to click all over the place to set things up, and there is no way to look at very many of the options at a time when they are spread across multiple tabs. Fine when you are following a "run sheet", but a total nightmare when you are trying to troubleshoot something.
Have you ever actually used the IIS or Exchange (or even Outlook) configuration GUI? <shudder>
2. Nothing makes up for good ingredients and good materials. I generally don't like aluminum pans because the thermal properties suck.
Copper rules!
3. Because of being a programmer where accuracy and preparation are paramount, I NEVER obey a recipe. You see, recipes don't take into account local variations. Thus they are only guidelines. Following a recipe to the letter is often a prelude to disaster. anyway most recipes aren't even that exact. A pinch of salt. Medium heat.
I like the advice of an earlier poster, look at several recipes for the same thing and decide how you are going to proceed from there. Putting a laptop in the kitchen to surf recipes has been great.
4. Cooking is easy. Most of it is a question of technique. This requires practice. Some techniques are difficult. Most aren't. Don't be afraid. Just do. And pretend that whatever comes out of the kitchen is exactly as you'd planned it.
Like Julia Child said, "Never apologize for your cooking."
So... what a special vpn for logging? or a totally separate wired network?
If you have the physical capacity, a separately wired network is more secure, but a vlan or vpn is often more practical. That's always the trade-off, security vs. practicality. The management network is usually a much simpler topology than the production network, so it isn't as bad as it sounds, and it is pretty effective against physical security issues.
I'm not logging to a specific machine BTW: my logs are being broadcast, so I can have my logging machine anywhere on the network segment, or I can have more than one. I suppose this reduces the risk of attempts to break into the logging machine to go change the logs there.
Broadcasting your syslogs across a production network is probably not a very good idea.
Ideally, you have a back-side management network that is separate from your front-side production network. All of your logging/IDS management/network management happens on the management network and none of the sensitive traffic is ever visible on the production network.
Good old syslog comes to the rescue. Besides logging locally to disk, also add a line to/etc/syslog.conf to log to a remote machine. That's probably enough read-only for you.
That actually may not be enough.
The systems I've worked with take it a bit further.
Once the syslog gets to the remote machine, it is then frequently dumped to an enclave machine behind the remote machine where it is dumped into a database for analysis and the raw logs are burned to cd or dvd on an autochanger.
The only proprietary piece of the system I saw was the software used to pipe the Windows systems' logs to the syslog server, but there may be open solutions available.
The rest could be handled by GNU/Linux/BSD and postgres (if you want to do the database part). The system I worked with ran on Solaris.
A bicycle shouldn't be ON the same road as cars. They can't go fast enough....and it is speed differences that cause most accidents (not to mention you can't see them very well).
No, it isn't the speed difference, it is the impatient asshole gabbing on his cellphone while driving that causes the accidents. Oh yeah, and holding a cell phone to you head definitely blocks your vision and restricts your range of motion, so of course you can't see the motor/bi-cyclist.
Repeat after me... Plural of anecdote is NOT data.
Doesn't apply. I'm not saying "I saw this one person who had a home theater and was morally opposed to downloading, therefore it is obviously true".
I am saying that of all of the people that I've known (a pretty decent sample) there is certainly a large majority who I am certain don't download via P2P, either because they are too fucking incompetent, morally wouldn't, or just can't be bothered. Think, for example, in terms of the over-50 population.
Look around at people and ask yourself, "If that person were to not go to the movie theater, would it be because they are downloading or would it be because they would rather rent it and watch it at home?" You may draw a different conclusion than I do, but if you actually think about it instead of being a fucking pedant parroting some line, that would be a good thing.
I know the difference between anecdote and data, but there is also such a thing as looking around you and thinking about it for a minute (ie., common sense).
Slashdot Mirror
What does all this mean? You have got a fucking chip on your shoulder.
I never said that an unpatched Linux box is safe. Please show me where I said that.
The parent I was replying to was essentially saying that you just put in the Windows CD, play Xbox for a while, and then you are "done". I was just pointing out that no, you are not done at that point, you then have to patch the system, and in my recent experience that is not hassle-free.
In the last week I've done both Debian and XP installs.
When I installed Debian via netinstall, it was up to date and fully patched at the end of the install.
When I installed XP via CD (no netinstall available), the system was not patched and I experienced difficulty in getting it to patch correctly.
Like I said (not implied, but explicitly stated), YMMV.
Just a quick reality check.
I think you've watched Enemy of the State maybe one too many times.
Surveillance satellites are not geo-synchronous, so they cannot observe in what most of us consider real-time. "Real-time" surveillance is not like watching a color movie of what's going on on the ground. It is more like analyzing black and white snapshots of what is on the ground as the satellite(s) pass over a given area.
Doing effective analysis requires a lot of resources, knowledge and experience that the typical person just doesn't have.
So you run an unpatched system? That doesn't sound very smart.
The base install of Windows is easy. The updates and patches (XP needs > 60) take much longer than the original install. If they will install at all (currently wrestling with the refusal of an XP system to apply the BITS update!).
What does all this mean? YMMV.
Yes most businesses really need the gaming and HD movie performance.
Individuals aren't the area where uptake is slow, MS's problem is with the corporate/government customers.
Vista runs like shit on a 1 GHz machine with 512MB of RAM, compared to XP.
Corporate IT aren't going to waste their money on unnecessary hardware upgrades just to get the newest/shiniest. There has to be some sort of payoff, or else they are going to wait until life-cycle replacements get the hardware to the point where it can run Vista as well as their current systems run XP.
I remember two reasons. One, it broke DBaseIII+ applications, which were widespread at the time. Two, it took up more of the precious 640KB conventional memory than DOS 3.11 used, so a lot of TSR stuff broke.
MS didn't have the long history of fucking over its customers then that it does now, so the PHB-types tended to take it out on the techs when their favorite productivity app suddenly stopped working.
That was the first in the long series of support nightmares that MS inflicted on us poor techs.
My reading of this is that once you upgrade, you are not allowed to run both the original version and the upgraded version.
This has nothing to do with being licensed for Vista, but running XP instead. What it forbids is upgrading to Vista, and then using the original XP license on another machine.
And if you want to skip right to the part about the electronics...http://www.discog.info/ultravox-inte rview5.html
OK, so what specifically do you propose?
Despite all of their other faults, the old IBM PS/2 series computers were great for this. You could strip them to the bone with your fingers and a quarter.
No. Galaxies are huge, and these are very far away, so even if they are moving really fast they won't appear to move on a human time scale.
But the cool thing IMHO is that we are literally looking 5 billion years back in time.
Earth hadn't even formed when this collision took place, but we're looking at it right now.
OK, so leaking classified information is a crime (ref: Valerie Plame), but "it was decided" that no crime took place in that case.
So the information leaked itself? No, Richard Armitage admits he leaked the information. You state that leaking classified info is a crime. But there's no crime in that case because...?
I still don't get your point.
OK, so who was indicted for leaking the info on Plame?
Oh yeah, nobody was.
What's your point?
Not a very convincing argument.
First, text editors have this really nifty feature called "search". Takes you right to the string that you request.
Second, what if I want to see/verify all settings? What if I want to make sure that Server B is configured exactly the same as Server A? Much easier to scroll through (or diff) a config file than to click on every single frigging tab and subdialog, remembering which ones I have looked at and what they were set to.
Yes, to each his own, but anyone who has done anything beyond setting up a single web server once, curses the MS GUI configuration interfaces.
Based on my experience with MS products, GUIs make really shitty configuration interfaces. You have to click all over the place to set things up, and there is no way to look at very many of the options at a time when they are spread across multiple tabs. Fine when you are following a "run sheet", but a total nightmare when you are trying to troubleshoot something.
Have you ever actually used the IIS or Exchange (or even Outlook) configuration GUI? <shudder>
Copper rules!
I like the advice of an earlier poster, look at several recipes for the same thing and decide how you are going to proceed from there. Putting a laptop in the kitchen to surf recipes has been great.
Like Julia Child said, "Never apologize for your cooking."
But you know what? They are doing it anyway, despite your pessimism.
Fortunately the people who are making this happen are a lot smarter than you seem to think you are.
The Germans aren't just sitting around thinking up reasons that things can't be done, they are figuring out how to do things and then -doing- them.
Maybe you should think about -that- for a minute.
It's right there in the name. GNU's Not Unix.
Stallman's head would probably explode if they certified a GNU/Linux system as Unix!
hmmm....
Broadcasting your syslogs across a production network is probably not a very good idea.
Ideally, you have a back-side management network that is separate from your front-side production network. All of your logging/IDS management/network management happens on the management network and none of the sensitive traffic is ever visible on the production network.
But that doesn't really scale very well, and then you have the problem of dealing with retention/storage requirements.
That actually may not be enough.
The systems I've worked with take it a bit further.
Once the syslog gets to the remote machine, it is then frequently dumped to an enclave machine behind the remote machine where it is dumped into a database for analysis and the raw logs are burned to cd or dvd on an autochanger.
The only proprietary piece of the system I saw was the software used to pipe the Windows systems' logs to the syslog server, but there may be open solutions available.
The rest could be handled by GNU/Linux/BSD and postgres (if you want to do the database part). The system I worked with ran on Solaris.
Yup, it's the same reason sharks won't eat a lawyer...
No, it isn't the speed difference, it is the impatient asshole gabbing on his cellphone while driving that causes the accidents. Oh yeah, and holding a cell phone to you head definitely blocks your vision and restricts your range of motion, so of course you can't see the motor/bi-cyclist.
Fuck you, asshole, I pay taxes, too.
Doesn't apply. I'm not saying "I saw this one person who had a home theater and was morally opposed to downloading, therefore it is obviously true".
I am saying that of all of the people that I've known (a pretty decent sample) there is certainly a large majority who I am certain don't download via P2P, either because they are too fucking incompetent, morally wouldn't, or just can't be bothered. Think, for example, in terms of the over-50 population.
Look around at people and ask yourself, "If that person were to not go to the movie theater, would it be because they are downloading or would it be because they would rather rent it and watch it at home?" You may draw a different conclusion than I do, but if you actually think about it instead of being a fucking pedant parroting some line, that would be a good thing.
I know the difference between anecdote and data, but there is also such a thing as looking around you and thinking about it for a minute (ie., common sense).
n/t