a compromised redhat machine I saw recently had a root kit installed which replaced ps, but not top, to hide some processes. Now what level of (in)competance do you think that kid had? Probably didn't even know much about what the root kit did, but installed it cause the other kids on irc told him to.
these folks are being given tools, and they use them. they don't know what the tools are doing, nor do they care. if they weren't given the tools, they'd find some other stupid things to do.
But really, neither obscurity nor full disclosure really addresses the issue. The issue is that these holes do exist, and better updating mechanisms must be built into operating systems so that holes (whether they were disclosed or covered up in the first place) can be plugged.
Maybe an active agent on the operating system to check and automatically install new security patches. Because no matter how a certain security hole is discovered and information about it disseminated, they never get plugged fast enough.
so I'm not sure why your jaw is on the floor.. What are the benefits of local storage?
In this scenario, I'd think a gig interconnect or two (on a dedicated storage network) to a NetApp might be fine. Probably faster than local storage (assuming you have a better subsystem on the NetApp), and you contain your storage concerns into a dedicated machine, rather than having to deal with host storage. Adding extra scsi host adapters while the db machine is active is a dance any sysadmin would surely avoid.
And while you're at it, why not have two NetApps clustered?
well this looks much like nca (network cache accelerator, or something) for Solaris (new in 8, but existed in 7 with the netra isp pack), a similar implementation of an in-kernel http server. As I understand it, it communicates with a user-space web server using "solaris doors" and currently only Sun Web Server can talk on that interface (well, probably iplanet too). Supposedly Apache will have a patch soon.
Network Cache Accelerator:
The Network Cache Accelerator increases web server performance by maintaining an in-kernel cache of web pages accessed during HTTP requests. NCA provides full HTTP 1.1 support in the kernel by either handling the request or passing it to the web server for processing.
So where's the tux equivalent for BSD (and shush, all you license troublemakers)?
-o
Sort of, if you dig down into the tech specs, the cube (at least) has an apple ADC, and a standard VGA connector. So if you want a digital display, you're locked into Apple's variety. But if you still have a crappy tube, you're good to go.
well I suppose he's a bit biased, seeing that he created the "lifestreams" technology while at Yale (mirrorworlds.com), which is basically an intelligent replacement for a filesystem.
and what if you have two companies, each for which you'd like a 3rdQuarterProjection.ps? And then you have another one, are you going to find all the other files and create a new naming scheme for this particular instance? No, don't be silly, it's unmanageable (but still the most common solution, I'll give you).
geez, you've got issues if you need coffee to get you out of that funk..
IE5 for the Mac is quite a good product, but it amazes me that MS says they'll have IE 5.5 for OSX in one year? I'd always heard that carbonizing an app took two weeks (I think Photoshop was done in a month or something like that).
I think they're doing this so that there's no native office suite for the Mac on the launch of the OS, to delay acceptance of the OS. Bastards..
I don't think he means "it wouldn't be such a big deal to have the OS linked with the browser," I think he means that it wouldn't be so bad to bundle the product with the operating system. Having two products sold together and inextricably bound are two entirely different things.
First of all I think the article was way too speculative, I doubt Apple will be releasing OSX on intel any time soon (now yellow box for win32 is another story), Apple makes their money on the hardware, and I can't think of a good reason they would want to stray from that plan.
But as far as OSX being a consumer OS that hides the inner workings from the average customer, I agree. That you can't get to the inner workings, I strongly disagree. The unix core of OSX is just as accessible as Linux, and implemented in a much more advanced fashion.
For instance, the passwd file is no longer used during runtime. It's still there, to provide persistence between boots, but during runtime, that is all stored in a netinfo db in memory, and there exists command line tools to query and change that information.
Another example: System V startup scripts. Don't like them? Welcome to the club. Apple is defining each startup/shutdown task as an entity defined in XML, with dependencies so the init task automatically calculates the correct order. No more S71rpc, etc.
MacOSX is not a replacement for MacOS or Linux, it is the brand new (the whole thing, not necessarily ach of the parts) successor to the 15 year old MacOS. And I wouldn't be surprised if Darwin took away some market share from Linux. I know that as soon as Darwin works well on Intel machines, I'm replacing one of my FreeBSD machines to see what it can do. And I'm sure it will get some serious application support within the next year.
Exactly. Napster (the idea not necessarily the current implementation) can be a great tool for previewing music on the web.
But here's the big problem: bands that suck. Sure, a strong word, but I mean the bands that have one good hit, their record company markets the hell out of them and bang, they've got a sale of the whole album. What, you say, you've already "previewed" the one good song on the album and the rest sucks? Well there's no chance you're going to buy that album.
I think this is the main reason the music industry is up in arms about this. Napster isn't going to go away, and I think they should be putting their efforts more in line with Napster instead of against it, but they do have serious problems with Napster (the idea) which they'd be hard-pressed to reconcile.
They're just going to have to think of a better way to market in conjunction with the Napster phenomenom.
This is a terrible way to maintain sessions if you are worried about caching. Cookies are the best with regards to caching, because the unique session string will require a cache to store a copy of the document even if it is identical to other pages.
That's a good question, but I fear the answer would be performance. I think the Slashguys should be focusing their efforts in a different direction though.
Here's where I speculate cause I've not checked out the code itself.
The SQL server (whatever variety they want to run) needn't be so beefy if there was some sort of caching integrated into the code. Are we hitting the SQL server every time a page is generated? Why not generate the index (for each of the kind of views like different thresholds) once a minute? Same with Slashboxes, they can be cached like nobody's business.
Plus, if you base the page assembly around caching, you can have the assembly later spread around the internet, and only have a database in one location (I'm being simplistic here).
Caching gives you sooo much performance if you use it sensibly.
cheers, -o
Re:The 1U unit is called the 'DS10L'
on
New Mega Alphas
·
· Score: 1
oh, this machine looks great, but I have one gripe with it.. It you want SCSI, say goodbye to any expansion. I'd love to have this machine with SCSI and a gigabit ethernet card, but one's gotta go.
Ah well, I'm going to get one anyway. I only wish FreeBSD/Alpha used the compaq compiler..
eh? I'll agree that the quicktime 4 interface was non-standard, and therefore considered substandard; but as far as those standards go linux (or any X based interface) has none. At least you have a common edit menu and keyboard shortcuts (in addition to a unified clipboard, etc) for all apps in the Mac OS.
And I don't quite understand your point about OSX..
But really, I don't know of any interface which is really good. Conversely, if you use computers regularly and know what functions should be available to you in any OS, you can get the hang of any GUI in a short time. Personally, I'm really looking forward to OSX, for a fresh face on the GUI, and a kick ass engine underneath (not to mention the amazing display layer).
Completely unusable.. Have you not been able to get it to work?
I doubt it, all the link encryption would be done in the hardware itself. I'm sure it'd just connect to your ethernet switch. Maybe with a serial console too. -o
Why are you posting anonymously? You seem to have some strong feeling about all this, and speak like an authority. "Debunking" this and that.. Man. Nobody is going to give anonymous coward a job..
I don't understand how you can say that an audit does not cause less bugs. The only way that could be is if you induce bugs during the audit. Huh? Do you think the OpenBSD guys are completely incompetant?
And secure by default is just that. Sure, a good admin can make either BSD or Linux secure or insecure. But our of the box is out of the box. How many remote root exploits are there for RedHat? How many for OpenBSD? I'm not giving numbers, but I can guarantee that OpenBSD is LESS.
There's a difference between open and free bsd there, dude.. And sure, Solaris has had it all for quite some time, but if you don't want to pay assloads of cash for the hardware, you want some other options. I'm sure FreeBSD will get this hardware crypto support soon, so you have your SMP support there.
Now sure, for huge compute apps, there's no intel boxes beating a sun or digital machine, but just use the right tool for the job, yes?
So I have a RH Linux box running Notes because I couldn't get a FreeBSD-intel box (either 3.3 or 3.4-RELEASE) running the Domino Server for Linux under linux binary compatibility.
Does anyone know if Domino is known to work under the linux compatibility for FreeBSD-4.0?
Oh sure, I think a CLI only augments a GUI. You shouldn't ever have to use the command line, but if the task at hand would be better done there (find / -name \*.wav -exec wav2mp3 {} \;), by all means.
But a good OS should also have consistency between the CLI and the GUI. If you delete something from the command line, it should be moved to the trash (or not, users' preference). But it should be the same behaviour for both modes of operation.
but this is an extremely important point.. It seems to me that most of the linux companies out there are interested in wide-scale adoption of their products, and how better to make the math above actually be the case than to invest some money in professional design?
Has anyone in the GNOME/KDE projects come up with human interface guidelines for their desktop environment? That seems the first step in coming up with a coherent one. Take the Mac, the consistent keyboard shortcuts, the existence of at least a bare minimum of menu items, it takes the users' focus off of learning the interface and actually on to using the software productively.
Oh sure, I started using Greg's Buttons on my Mac II in 92 (what a great machine..). I think the scope of the Appearance Manager is much more than just what Kaleidoscope allows you to manipulate, it probably just exposes, say, 20% of what the Appearance Mgr allows for, but in a nice easy way so as to integrate nicely with the default appearance, Platinum. In other words, Kaleidoscope just acts as an interface for the most easily customizable parts of the Appearance Manager.
In Aqua, for instance the open/save dialog, all the drawing routines and graphic resources have changed so that it takes advantage of the new graphics layer. Kaleidoscope for OSX probably wouldn't want to take on allowing users to customize that, it will just allow changing the graphic resources (but maybe in a vector based format rather than a pixel based format). If people really want to change the graphic routines, they can write directly to the Appearance Manager, but I'm guessing they have to write an entirely new appearance.
But I probably won't use anything like that, I think the Aqua interface looks splendid as is.
I'm almost positive Jobs said in the MWSF keynote that Aqua was just a theme. I must clarify theme, of course, cause every OS/window mgr/etc has a different definition, but I think that theme in this instance is almost akin to a window mgr in X, where you can define what code gets run when you do a mouseover, what the default action is when a new window pops up, how the mouse focus behaves, etc. Not at all limited to window decorations and colored buttons, etc like kaleidoscope (sp?) and windowblinds or whatever on win32.
I don't really anticipate many people to come up with alternate themes because it sounds like a daunting job, but you never know, Audion has some incredible skins and the analagous work for "themeing" OSX would be of course more, but about the same difficulty..
Now if only Lotus comes up with a decent Notes client, carbonized for OSX, I'll have to buy myself a G4.
Sure, I understand your gripe with no colons, but maybe the content information shouldn't go in the title. I really like the BeOS's filesystem and how it allows for multiple arbitrary file attributes, so you can have a bookmark with the date as the filename, and the URL in an attribute. Maybe another one for the last time visited, etc.
Putting a URL in the title is sort of akin to putting txt or doc in the title (oh, the 8.3), but you're not to blame for that..
So what exactly are your reservations about the gui? I think the new gui looks great, of course I've not yet used it, so I can't say for certain..
But one thing that I think everyone needs to realize: you don't have to use Aqua! Aqua is just the standard Appearance Manager theme for MacOS X, you can still use Platinum if you like. Or get crazy and make yourself a new one.
For usability, I cannot comment on the new MacOS interface, but in my opinion the MacOS interface cannot get worse (and has always been better) than the others as far as the environment consistency is concerned. On the Mac there's no question as to what the modifier key is, all apps have the same shortcuts for the same functionality, it's a cohesive environment.
Oh, if you just stuck around for a quick explanation, everything would be clear. Interfaces need not be self explanatory, that just dumbs them down. But these buttons use one of the best interface ideas this century: traffic lights. Red close, yellow minimize, and green maximize.
Slashdot Mirror
a compromised redhat machine I saw recently had a root kit installed which replaced ps, but not top, to hide some processes. Now what level of (in)competance do you think that kid had? Probably didn't even know much about what the root kit did, but installed it cause the other kids on irc told him to.
these folks are being given tools, and they use them. they don't know what the tools are doing, nor do they care. if they weren't given the tools, they'd find some other stupid things to do.
But really, neither obscurity nor full disclosure really addresses the issue. The issue is that these holes do exist, and better updating mechanisms must be built into operating systems so that holes (whether they were disclosed or covered up in the first place) can be plugged.
Maybe an active agent on the operating system to check and automatically install new security patches. Because no matter how a certain security hole is discovered and information about it disseminated, they never get plugged fast enough.
cheers,
-o
so I'm not sure why your jaw is on the floor.. What are the benefits of local storage?
In this scenario, I'd think a gig interconnect or two (on a dedicated storage network) to a NetApp might be fine. Probably faster than local storage (assuming you have a better subsystem on the NetApp), and you contain your storage concerns into a dedicated machine, rather than having to deal with host storage. Adding extra scsi host adapters while the db machine is active is a dance any sysadmin would surely avoid.
And while you're at it, why not have two NetApps clustered?
cheers,
-o
from http://www.sun.c om/aboutsun/media/presskits/solaris/howitwrks.html :
Network Cache Accelerator:
The Network Cache Accelerator increases web server performance by maintaining an in-kernel cache of web pages accessed during HTTP requests. NCA provides full HTTP 1.1 support in the kernel by either handling the request or passing it to the web server for processing.
So where's the tux equivalent for BSD (and shush, all you license troublemakers)?
-o
Sort of, if you dig down into the tech specs, the cube (at least) has an apple ADC, and a standard VGA connector. So if you want a digital display, you're locked into Apple's variety. But if you still have a crappy tube, you're good to go.
-o
well I suppose he's a bit biased, seeing that he created the "lifestreams" technology while at Yale (mirrorworlds.com), which is basically an intelligent replacement for a filesystem.
and what if you have two companies, each for which you'd like a 3rdQuarterProjection.ps? And then you have another one, are you going to find all the other files and create a new naming scheme for this particular instance? No, don't be silly, it's unmanageable (but still the most common solution, I'll give you).
geez, you've got issues if you need coffee to get you out of that funk..
-o
IE5 for the Mac is quite a good product, but it amazes me that MS says they'll have IE 5.5 for OSX in one year? I'd always heard that carbonizing an app took two weeks (I think Photoshop was done in a month or something like that).
I think they're doing this so that there's no native office suite for the Mac on the launch of the OS, to delay acceptance of the OS. Bastards..
cheers,
-o
I don't think he means "it wouldn't be such a big deal to have the OS linked with the browser," I think he means that it wouldn't be so bad to bundle the product with the operating system. Having two products sold together and inextricably bound are two entirely different things.
First of all I think the article was way too speculative, I doubt Apple will be releasing OSX on intel any time soon (now yellow box for win32 is another story), Apple makes their money on the hardware, and I can't think of a good reason they would want to stray from that plan.
But as far as OSX being a consumer OS that hides the inner workings from the average customer, I agree. That you can't get to the inner workings, I strongly disagree. The unix core of OSX is just as accessible as Linux, and implemented in a much more advanced fashion.
For instance, the passwd file is no longer used during runtime. It's still there, to provide persistence between boots, but during runtime, that is all stored in a netinfo db in memory, and there exists command line tools to query and change that information.
Another example: System V startup scripts. Don't like them? Welcome to the club. Apple is defining each startup/shutdown task as an entity defined in XML, with dependencies so the init task automatically calculates the correct order. No more S71rpc, etc.
MacOSX is not a replacement for MacOS or Linux, it is the brand new (the whole thing, not necessarily ach of the parts) successor to the 15 year old MacOS. And I wouldn't be surprised if Darwin took away some market share from Linux. I know that as soon as Darwin works well on Intel machines, I'm replacing one of my FreeBSD machines to see what it can do. And I'm sure it will get some serious application support within the next year.
cheers,
-o
Exactly. Napster (the idea not necessarily the current implementation) can be a great tool for previewing music on the web.
But here's the big problem: bands that suck. Sure, a strong word, but I mean the bands that have one good hit, their record company markets the hell out of them and bang, they've got a sale of the whole album. What, you say, you've already "previewed" the one good song on the album and the rest sucks? Well there's no chance you're going to buy that album.
I think this is the main reason the music industry is up in arms about this. Napster isn't going to go away, and I think they should be putting their efforts more in line with Napster instead of against it, but they do have serious problems with Napster (the idea) which they'd be hard-pressed to reconcile.
They're just going to have to think of a better way to market in conjunction with the Napster phenomenom.
cheers,
-o
This is a terrible way to maintain sessions if you are worried about caching. Cookies are the best with regards to caching, because the unique session string will require a cache to store a copy of the document even if it is identical to other pages.
just something to think about..
cheers,
-o
That's a good question, but I fear the answer would be performance. I think the Slashguys should be focusing their efforts in a different direction though.
Here's where I speculate cause I've not checked out the code itself.
The SQL server (whatever variety they want to run) needn't be so beefy if there was some sort of caching integrated into the code. Are we hitting the SQL server every time a page is generated? Why not generate the index (for each of the kind of views like different thresholds) once a minute? Same with Slashboxes, they can be cached like nobody's business.
Plus, if you base the page assembly around caching, you can have the assembly later spread around the internet, and only have a database in one location (I'm being simplistic here).
Caching gives you sooo much performance if you use it sensibly.
cheers,
-o
oh, this machine looks great, but I have one gripe with it.. It you want SCSI, say goodbye to any expansion. I'd love to have this machine with SCSI and a gigabit ethernet card, but one's gotta go.
Ah well, I'm going to get one anyway. I only wish FreeBSD/Alpha used the compaq compiler..
cheers,
-o
eh? I'll agree that the quicktime 4 interface was non-standard, and therefore considered substandard; but as far as those standards go linux (or any X based interface) has none. At least you have a common edit menu and keyboard shortcuts (in addition to a unified clipboard, etc) for all apps in the Mac OS.
And I don't quite understand your point about OSX..
But really, I don't know of any interface which is really good. Conversely, if you use computers regularly and know what functions should be available to you in any OS, you can get the hang of any GUI in a short time. Personally, I'm really looking forward to OSX, for a fresh face on the GUI, and a kick ass engine underneath (not to mention the amazing display layer).
Completely unusable.. Have you not been able to get it to work?
cheers,
-o
I doubt it, all the link encryption would be done in the hardware itself. I'm sure it'd just connect to your ethernet switch. Maybe with a serial console too.
-o
Why are you posting anonymously? You seem to have some strong feeling about all this, and speak like an authority. "Debunking" this and that.. Man. Nobody is going to give anonymous coward a job..
I don't understand how you can say that an audit does not cause less bugs. The only way that could be is if you induce bugs during the audit. Huh? Do you think the OpenBSD guys are completely incompetant?
And secure by default is just that. Sure, a good admin can make either BSD or Linux secure or insecure. But our of the box is out of the box. How many remote root exploits are there for RedHat? How many for OpenBSD? I'm not giving numbers, but I can guarantee that OpenBSD is LESS.
Geez, kids these days..
-o
There's a difference between open and free bsd there, dude.. And sure, Solaris has had it all for quite some time, but if you don't want to pay assloads of cash for the hardware, you want some other options. I'm sure FreeBSD will get this hardware crypto support soon, so you have your SMP support there.
Now sure, for huge compute apps, there's no intel boxes beating a sun or digital machine, but just use the right tool for the job, yes?
cheers,
-o
Damn that's funny.. who needs photos anyway when we have ascii art?
-o
So I have a RH Linux box running Notes because I couldn't get a FreeBSD-intel box (either 3.3 or 3.4-RELEASE) running the Domino Server for Linux under linux binary compatibility.
Does anyone know if Domino is known to work under the linux compatibility for FreeBSD-4.0?
cheers,
-o
Oh sure, I think a CLI only augments a GUI. You shouldn't ever have to use the command line, but if the task at hand would be better done there (find / -name \*.wav -exec wav2mp3 {} \;), by all means.
But a good OS should also have consistency between the CLI and the GUI. If you delete something from the command line, it should be moved to the trash (or not, users' preference). But it should be the same behaviour for both modes of operation.
cheers,
-o
but this is an extremely important point.. It seems to me that most of the linux companies out there are interested in wide-scale adoption of their products, and how better to make the math above actually be the case than to invest some money in professional design?
Has anyone in the GNOME/KDE projects come up with human interface guidelines for their desktop environment? That seems the first step in coming up with a coherent one. Take the Mac, the consistent keyboard shortcuts, the existence of at least a bare minimum of menu items, it takes the users' focus off of learning the interface and actually on to using the software productively.
cheers,
-o
Oh sure, I started using Greg's Buttons on my Mac II in 92 (what a great machine..). I think the scope of the Appearance Manager is much more than just what Kaleidoscope allows you to manipulate, it probably just exposes, say, 20% of what the Appearance Mgr allows for, but in a nice easy way so as to integrate nicely with the default appearance, Platinum. In other words, Kaleidoscope just acts as an interface for the most easily customizable parts of the Appearance Manager.
In Aqua, for instance the open/save dialog, all the drawing routines and graphic resources have changed so that it takes advantage of the new graphics layer. Kaleidoscope for OSX probably wouldn't want to take on allowing users to customize that, it will just allow changing the graphic resources (but maybe in a vector based format rather than a pixel based format). If people really want to change the graphic routines, they can write directly to the Appearance Manager, but I'm guessing they have to write an entirely new appearance.
But I probably won't use anything like that, I think the Aqua interface looks splendid as is.
cheers,
-o
I'm almost positive Jobs said in the MWSF keynote that Aqua was just a theme. I must clarify theme, of course, cause every OS/window mgr/etc has a different definition, but I think that theme in this instance is almost akin to a window mgr in X, where you can define what code gets run when you do a mouseover, what the default action is when a new window pops up, how the mouse focus behaves, etc. Not at all limited to window decorations and colored buttons, etc like kaleidoscope (sp?) and windowblinds or whatever on win32.
I don't really anticipate many people to come up with alternate themes because it sounds like a daunting job, but you never know, Audion has some incredible skins and the analagous work for "themeing" OSX would be of course more, but about the same difficulty..
Now if only Lotus comes up with a decent Notes client, carbonized for OSX, I'll have to buy myself a G4.
cheers,
-o
Sure, I understand your gripe with no colons, but maybe the content information shouldn't go in the title. I really like the BeOS's filesystem and how it allows for multiple arbitrary file attributes, so you can have a bookmark with the date as the filename, and the URL in an attribute. Maybe another one for the last time visited, etc.
Putting a URL in the title is sort of akin to putting txt or doc in the title (oh, the 8.3), but you're not to blame for that..
cheers,
-o
So what exactly are your reservations about the gui? I think the new gui looks great, of course I've not yet used it, so I can't say for certain..
But one thing that I think everyone needs to realize: you don't have to use Aqua! Aqua is just the standard Appearance Manager theme for MacOS X, you can still use Platinum if you like. Or get crazy and make yourself a new one.
For usability, I cannot comment on the new MacOS interface, but in my opinion the MacOS interface cannot get worse (and has always been better) than the others as far as the environment consistency is concerned. On the Mac there's no question as to what the modifier key is, all apps have the same shortcuts for the same functionality, it's a cohesive environment.
brown it!
-o
Oh, if you just stuck around for a quick explanation, everything would be clear. Interfaces need not be self explanatory, that just dumbs them down. But these buttons use one of the best interface ideas this century: traffic lights. Red close, yellow minimize, and green maximize.
capiche?
-o