However, google being a bussiness neither means that they are automatically right, nor that they are automatically wrong, so what exactly is your point here?
I agree that this is a reason not to use it for people who want free (as in freedom) software. However, I think those people are clearly in the minority.
Finally, I don't like you implying that people who disagree with you on free software don't value freedom, that's just stupid and insulting.
They don't see anything wrong here. Bild not only reported a non-story, because the guy never made diesel out of cats, nor does he intend to do, but also misquoted the Animal Rights Activists. http://www.bildblog.de/?p=791 (Sorry, only in German)
"Most of the major studios use Linux -- such as DreamWorks with more than 1,500 Linux desktops and 3,500 Linux servers. The MovieEditor Conference is an all-day event on computer-based filmmaking in downtown Los Angeles on August 3rd. Studio technology chiefs and other experts discuss ongoing work using Linux in feature animation and visual effects. Presented in collaboration with LinuxMovies.org."
"But then who advocates "Default permit" on the basis that security-wise it's the right thing to do?"
No, he does not!!!! No, he does not!!! RTFA! RTFA! RTFA!
And I quote:
"The opposite of "Default Permit" is "Default Deny" and it is a really good idea. It takes dedication, thought, and understanding to implement a "Default Deny" policy, which is why it is so seldom done. It's not that much harder to do than "Default Permit" but you'll sleep much better at night."
Now it isn't really surprising that some people on/. do have a problem with understanding what they read, but this, this is just amazing. Needless to say that it promptly got modded up.
"2) Enumerating Badness
So you want to write a virus scanner that somehow can recognise viruses without being told which programs are viruses. Modern virus checkers already mostly do this. With spyware it's very hard for a computer to tell the difference between a program you wanted installing and one you didn't. How do you expect it to tell?"
No, as he makes clear he does not want to write such a virus scanner. What he rightly asks is why people who only need 10 applications should even be able and allowed to run any other software. In other words, he's also advocating a deny default policy here. Deny everything from being executed, unless it is really needed.
"3) Penetrate and Patch
So you are saying we should write code without bugs and holes? What a great idea that is? why did no-one think of saying that before?"
Nope, he's pointing out that penetrate and patch is a very ineffective approach to achieving security and that it's far better to already start out with security in mind. Not a dumb idea at all.
"4) Hacking is cool
You think people should learn how to stop hacking and intrusion without learning how existing hacks work? Then you are stupid. Shush."
Nope, not really. He merely suggests that it's ineffective to say the least to engage in an arms race with the bad boys.
"5) Educating Users
So you are saying that we have to do security without teaching users how to do it. That just isn't going to work unless you never let users install their own applications or plug-ins. Yes teaching users is hard, but it has to be a vital part."
Nope, he's simply pointing out that not letting users install their own applications or plug-ins is a much more sensible approach than to count on educating users. He points out that one might get the impression from past experiences that educating users hasn't been an overwhelming success.
"6) Action is better than Inaction
So, after saying the state we are in is rubbish, you now say we shouldn't actually change anything. Eh? Or are you saying "don't try something new without testing it first"? Well thats more than a little obvious."
Nope, he is saying that contrary to what many IT people like to do, that is follow the hype of the moment, it is often a better idea to simply just wait how a new idea works out and then adopt it. I can't see anything wrong with that advice.
"This is just trolling, crap, and obviousness. Your average slashdot post really." Congratulations, I couldn't have described your post better myself.
As the article rightly points out, and btw. if you had bothered to read it you would have been aware of this, there is no reason at all why joeuser should even be able to download and execute "naked_sluts.exe" on a companies network.
And I quote: "Dealing with things like attachments and phishing is another case of "Default Permit" - our favorite dumb idea. After all, if you're letting all of your users get attachments in their E-mail you're "Default Permit"ing anything that gets sent to them. A better idea might be to simply quarantine all attachments as they come into the enterprise, delete all the executables outright, and store the few file types you decide are acceptable on a staging server where users can log in with an SSL-enabled browser (requiring a password will quash a lot of worm propagation mechanisms right away) and pull them down. There are freeware tools like MIMEDefang that can be easily harnessed to strip attachments from incoming E-mails, write them to a per-user directory, and replace the attachment in the E-mail message with a URL to the stripped attachment. Why educate your users how to cope with a problem if you can just drive a stake through the problem's heart?"
And what about users that would be able to do something against the security risk (not use a certain program, disable a vulerable service or firewall it in for example), if they only would be aware of it?
While we are at it: I'm currently using gnome and:
Top left corner: main menu Top right corner: calender Bottom left corner: show desktop Bottom right corner: trash
Note though, that you have to actually press a mouse button to trigger any action, which might be a good thing, as it prevents accidently triggering something you don't want to trigger.
Seriously, I don't know what OS the self proclaimed expert, who wrote the article, is using.
Munich Re. simply provided numbers about what they had to pay out in the last year and they try to do constant risk assessement to cover their asses and in the process came to the not very surprising realisation, that more and more people are affected by natural disasters, so what exactly is your problem?
And where exactly did they imply anything about how the US should remake its society?
They want to set it up in the refugee camps so that people there are able to communicate and maybe, hopefully find family members and friends they haven't heard from yet.
and you are trying to create a MS vs. Linux flamewar on/. Disgusting.
Ah, and also already starting the "its everyones fault but Bush" game, now ain't that nice. Again, disgusting.
As you rightly say, people are dead and people are dying right now and the response to this disaster was anything but adequate, as is plain to see and that's all you care about? Pathetic.
"The rest of it was perfectly correct and enlightened"
No it wasn't. Read the comments instead of just feeling sorry for yourself. Examples: - Apache reloading the config file without restarting. - IIS actually restarts, contrary to your claim. - You don't have to sift through thousands of config files to change to KDE, you just have to chose KDE in the graphical login manager. - Sudo is available, and su gets loged. Just to name a few.
"You dismiss everything I say as "wrong", and avoid facing the facts that other users see it differently than you do." I'm really having a hard time understanding this sentence. Do you want to tell me that I avoid facing the facts (what facts, btw.), or do you want to tell me that I avoid facing the fact that others have a different opinion.
If the first should be the case, there unfortunately aren't a whole lot of facts you provide, if the latter should be the case, believe me, I'm aware of the fact that people have different opinions (hell, I'm posting on/., am I not?)
Finally, trying to get serious, why don't you take a more levelheaded approach to this matter? This is not a religious war, though you seem to have mistaken it for one, this is only about operating systems. Now you are more familiar with one of them and naturally feel more comfortable using it. That's fine, no problem here, but please accept that others might feel differently.
Slashdot Mirror
Now really, thanks for stating the obvious.
However, google being a bussiness neither means that they are automatically right, nor that they are automatically wrong, so what exactly is your point here?
Yes, as an other "obvious GNU fanatic" I did.
I agree that this is a reason not to use it for people who want free (as in freedom) software.
However, I think those people are clearly in the minority.
Finally, I don't like you implying that people who disagree with you on free software don't value freedom, that's just stupid and insulting.
They don't see anything wrong here.
Bild not only reported a non-story, because the guy never made diesel out of cats, nor does he intend to do, but also misquoted the Animal Rights Activists.
http://www.bildblog.de/?p=791 (Sorry, only in German)
This doesn't come as a surprise for anyone living in Germany.
The Bild is Germanys largest tabloid and is well known for not always reporting overly accurate, to put it mildly.
That said, this guy seems to be making quite some waves here in Germany. At least I remember seeing him on TV lately, talking about his invention.
And if his claims are true, this really could prove to be a very useful invention, especially with the recent develpements in oil prices.
"Most of the major studios use Linux -- such as DreamWorks with more than 1,500 Linux desktops and 3,500 Linux servers. The MovieEditor Conference is an all-day event on computer-based filmmaking in downtown Los Angeles on August 3rd. Studio technology chiefs and other experts discuss ongoing work using Linux in feature animation and visual effects. Presented in collaboration with LinuxMovies.org."
/ 1551250&tid=126&tid=106
http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/27
"You can apologize now, asswipe."
You're right and I would, if it wouldn't be for the asswipe, wanker!
Btw., he's giving a lot of examples of people using a default permit policy as a security idea, so your point is still moot.
"But then who advocates "Default permit" on the basis that security-wise it's the right thing to do?"
No, he does not!!!! No, he does not!!!
RTFA! RTFA! RTFA!
And I quote:
"The opposite of "Default Permit" is "Default Deny" and it is a really good idea. It takes dedication, thought, and understanding to implement a "Default Deny" policy, which is why it is so seldom done. It's not that much harder to do than "Default Permit" but you'll sleep much better at night."
Now it isn't really surprising that some people on /. do have a problem with understanding what they read, but this, this is just amazing.
Needless to say that it promptly got modded up.
"2) Enumerating Badness
So you want to write a virus scanner that somehow can recognise viruses without being told which programs are viruses. Modern virus checkers already mostly do this. With spyware it's very hard for a computer to tell the difference between a program you wanted installing and one you didn't. How do you expect it to tell?"
No, as he makes clear he does not want to write such a virus scanner. What he rightly asks is why people who only need 10 applications should even be able and allowed to run any other software.
In other words, he's also advocating a deny default policy here. Deny everything from being executed, unless it is really needed.
"3) Penetrate and Patch
So you are saying we should write code without bugs and holes? What a great idea that is? why did no-one think of saying that before?"
Nope, he's pointing out that penetrate and patch is a very ineffective approach to achieving security and that it's far better to already start out with security in mind. Not a dumb idea at all.
"4) Hacking is cool
You think people should learn how to stop hacking and intrusion without learning how existing hacks work? Then you are stupid. Shush."
Nope, not really. He merely suggests that it's ineffective to say the least to engage in an arms race with the bad boys.
"5) Educating Users
So you are saying that we have to do security without teaching users how to do it. That just isn't going to work unless you never let users install their own applications or plug-ins. Yes teaching users is hard, but it has to be a vital part."
Nope, he's simply pointing out that not letting users install their own applications or plug-ins is a much more sensible approach than to count on educating users. He points out that one might get the impression from past experiences that educating users hasn't been an overwhelming success.
"6) Action is better than Inaction
So, after saying the state we are in is rubbish, you now say we shouldn't actually change anything. Eh? Or are you saying "don't try something new without testing it first"? Well thats more than a little obvious."
Nope, he is saying that contrary to what many IT people like to do, that is follow the hype of the moment, it is often a better idea to simply just wait how a new idea works out and then adopt it. I can't see anything wrong with that advice.
"This is just trolling, crap, and obviousness. Your average slashdot post really."
Congratulations, I couldn't have described your post better myself.
As the article rightly points out, and btw. if you had bothered to read it you would have been aware of this, there is no reason at all why joeuser should even be able to download and execute "naked_sluts.exe" on a companies network.
And I quote:
"Dealing with things like attachments and phishing is another case of "Default Permit" - our favorite dumb idea. After all, if you're letting all of your users get attachments in their E-mail you're "Default Permit"ing anything that gets sent to them. A better idea might be to simply quarantine all attachments as they come into the enterprise, delete all the executables outright, and store the few file types you decide are acceptable on a staging server where users can log in with an SSL-enabled browser (requiring a password will quash a lot of worm propagation mechanisms right away) and pull them down. There are freeware tools like MIMEDefang that can be easily harnessed to strip attachments from incoming E-mails, write them to a per-user directory, and replace the attachment in the E-mail message with a URL to the stripped attachment. Why educate your users how to cope with a problem if you can just drive a stake through the problem's heart?"
Did you actually read the article, or did you just repeat one of its points by accident?
But we are more intelligent than those evil terrorists.
Instead of letting them destroy our way of life, we destroy it ourselves.
Thanks for your insightful comments Dame Edna...
Yes, post stupid questions and feeble attempts at a joke on slashdot.
And what about users that would be able to do something against the security risk (not use a certain program, disable a vulerable service or firewall it in for example), if they only would be aware of it?
While we are at it:
I'm currently using gnome and:
Top left corner: main menu
Top right corner: calender
Bottom left corner: show desktop
Bottom right corner: trash
Note though, that you have to actually press a mouse button to trigger any action, which might be a good thing, as it prevents accidently triggering something you don't want to trigger.
Seriously, I don't know what OS the self proclaimed expert, who wrote the article, is using.
http://amarok.kde.org/blog/archives/56-Fitts-Corne rs.html
Interesting read, I think.
"Because you phrase everything as a question so people give you all the answers?"
Do you think so? Really?
Could this be the case?
In fact, the feedback process started today:
/ 2005q3/000116.html
/. did not report on this trivial news, but instead on this well researched msnbc artile...
https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/gplv3
Here's the announcement:
http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/press-release
Boy, am I glad that
No, the GPL3 will not have these provision?
/ 2005q3/000116.html
How do I know?
Because the process of drafting and discussiong the GPL3 has just started.
Here's todays press release from the FSF Europe
http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/press-release
and here:
https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/gplv3
is the mailing list, in case you want to participate in the discussion.
I take it you found out these terrible things about /. only while browsing the side in your private time?
Huh?
Munich Re. simply provided numbers about what they had to pay out in the last year and they try to do constant risk assessement to cover their asses and in the process came to the not very surprising realisation, that more and more people are affected by natural disasters, so what exactly is your problem?
And where exactly did they imply anything about how the US should remake its society?
They want to set it up in the refugee camps so that people there are able to communicate and maybe, hopefully find family members and friends they haven't heard from yet.
What exactly is wrong with this idea?
and you are trying to create a MS vs. Linux flamewar on /.
Disgusting.
Ah, and also already starting the "its everyones fault but Bush" game, now ain't that nice.
Again, disgusting.
As you rightly say, people are dead and people are dying right now and the response to this disaster was anything but adequate, as is plain to see and that's all you care about?
Pathetic.
"Which distro is this on?"
For example Suse, Mandriva, Xandros, Fedora, Ubuntu, to name a few.
"The rest of it was perfectly correct and enlightened"
/., am I not?)
No it wasn't. Read the comments instead of just feeling sorry for yourself.
Examples:
- Apache reloading the config file without restarting.
- IIS actually restarts, contrary to your claim.
- You don't have to sift through thousands of config files to change to KDE, you just have to chose KDE in the graphical login manager.
- Sudo is available, and su gets loged.
Just to name a few.
"You dismiss everything I say as "wrong", and avoid facing the facts that other users see it differently than you do."
I'm really having a hard time understanding this sentence.
Do you want to tell me that I avoid facing the facts (what facts, btw.), or do you want to tell me that I avoid facing the fact that others have a different opinion.
If the first should be the case, there unfortunately aren't a whole lot of facts you provide, if the latter should be the case, believe me, I'm aware of the fact that people have different opinions (hell, I'm posting on
Finally, trying to get serious, why don't you take a more levelheaded approach to this matter? This is not a religious war, though you seem to have mistaken it for one, this is only about operating systems.
Now you are more familiar with one of them and naturally feel more comfortable using it. That's fine, no problem here, but please accept that others might feel differently.