Linux exploits and vulnerabilities: All the excuses are valid now!
-
We'll reach a point where Linux is the dominant OS and then Windows will look sexy again, the same way people think the Mac is superior. Finish this sentence: We're movin' on up, to the top...
Senkwe Chanda wrote: We'll reach a point where Linux is the dominant OS Highly unlikely. Linux is sexy because it's not from Microsoft (regardless of it's technical merits). And Microsoft is not made up of babbling morons that don't know how turn on a computer, they know their stuff. They've come to realize that their procedures aren't working ok and they are fixing them. Remember when everybody said that Microsoft was too late for the internet and they were history? Well, they turned around and made history. I see no reason why they cannot pull it off again with their security initiatives.
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
-
Senkwe Chanda wrote: We'll reach a point where Linux is the dominant OS Highly unlikely. Linux is sexy because it's not from Microsoft (regardless of it's technical merits). And Microsoft is not made up of babbling morons that don't know how turn on a computer, they know their stuff. They've come to realize that their procedures aren't working ok and they are fixing them. Remember when everybody said that Microsoft was too late for the internet and they were history? Well, they turned around and made history. I see no reason why they cannot pull it off again with their security initiatives.
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
Eddie, I would have agreed with your assessment maybe a year or two ago. But the issue isn't really which OS is sexier at the moment. Microsoft simply cannot compete with a free product. It's that simple. As soon as Linux becomes easier to use (a goal that is easier to achieve than MS better securing their software) then it will be "good enough" for the general public, "good enough" for business as well. The applications are already streaming in to Linux. So MS has to innovate much faster than they are doing now or else their lower TCO argument (which works right now) will become false. I believe they hire top class people and I'm an ardent admirer of their vision. But you just can't compete with "free" when the free product is high quality. Impossible. Having said that, the decision to have ASP.NET support for Apache is a brilliant move intended to help stem the tide. But it won't be enough. I think if Palladium fails to catch on, then MS could begin a steady decline in dominance. If it DOES catch on however, it's bye bye to Linux forever :-) Finish this sentence: We're movin' on up, to the top...
-
Try asking this question on slashdot.org... It should be even better than 'which is the best linux distro' or 'why kde is better than gnome'. :) Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com
- It's for protection
- Protection from what? Zee Germans?Tomasz Sowinski wrote: 'why kde is better than gnome It's obvious :) Jared jparsons@jparsons.org www.prism.gatech.edu/~gte477n
-
Why is it that there's no justification for a Windows vulnerability, but when there's a Linux vulnerability all the Windows excuses are suddenly valid?
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
Because slashdot has too many 14 year olds posting to it who have self confidence issues. Don't get me wrong, I use Linux on most of my machines. I think it is far superior to Windows security wise but I also take a lot of time to secure my machines and I am well aware that Linux has its security issues. For example the most recent SSH exploit opened up a remote root hole in the last few releases of almost all of the major distros ( including Redhat ) Jared jparsons@jparsons.org www.prism.gatech.edu/~gte477n
-
Senkwe Chanda wrote: We'll reach a point where Linux is the dominant OS Highly unlikely. Linux is sexy because it's not from Microsoft (regardless of it's technical merits). And Microsoft is not made up of babbling morons that don't know how turn on a computer, they know their stuff. They've come to realize that their procedures aren't working ok and they are fixing them. Remember when everybody said that Microsoft was too late for the internet and they were history? Well, they turned around and made history. I see no reason why they cannot pull it off again with their security initiatives.
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
Eddie Velasquez wrote: I see no reason why they cannot pull it off again with their security initiatives. Number one reason. Users are stupid Jared jparsons@jparsons.org www.prism.gatech.edu/~gte477n
-
Because slashdot has too many 14 year olds posting to it who have self confidence issues. Don't get me wrong, I use Linux on most of my machines. I think it is far superior to Windows security wise but I also take a lot of time to secure my machines and I am well aware that Linux has its security issues. For example the most recent SSH exploit opened up a remote root hole in the last few releases of almost all of the major distros ( including Redhat ) Jared jparsons@jparsons.org www.prism.gatech.edu/~gte477n
jparsons wrote: For example the most recent SSH exploit opened up a remote root hole in the last few releases of almost all of the major distros ( including Redhat ) So - which distro is the best? :) Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com
- It's for protection
- Protection from what? Zee Germans? -
jparsons wrote: For example the most recent SSH exploit opened up a remote root hole in the last few releases of almost all of the major distros ( including Redhat ) So - which distro is the best? :) Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com
- It's for protection
- Protection from what? Zee Germans?Tomasz Sowinski wrote: So - which distro is the best? Debian. Debian's package management system is leagues ahead of any other distros. You can keep your linux system up todate with two simple commands ( easily runnable from cron ) $>apt-getupdate $>apt-getdistupgrade This will not only go out, get the latest debian package for all applications you run. For most daemon applications ( example sshd ) it will stop the daemon and start running the newer version. Jared jparsons@jparsons.org www.prism.gatech.edu/~gte477n
-
Eddie, I would have agreed with your assessment maybe a year or two ago. But the issue isn't really which OS is sexier at the moment. Microsoft simply cannot compete with a free product. It's that simple. As soon as Linux becomes easier to use (a goal that is easier to achieve than MS better securing their software) then it will be "good enough" for the general public, "good enough" for business as well. The applications are already streaming in to Linux. So MS has to innovate much faster than they are doing now or else their lower TCO argument (which works right now) will become false. I believe they hire top class people and I'm an ardent admirer of their vision. But you just can't compete with "free" when the free product is high quality. Impossible. Having said that, the decision to have ASP.NET support for Apache is a brilliant move intended to help stem the tide. But it won't be enough. I think if Palladium fails to catch on, then MS could begin a steady decline in dominance. If it DOES catch on however, it's bye bye to Linux forever :-) Finish this sentence: We're movin' on up, to the top...
Senkwe Chanda wrote: Microsoft simply cannot compete with a free product But, remember, what do you get with a "free" product? Zero, nada, zip, nothing! Doesn't work? Too bad, it was free! Maybe the linux binaries are free, but the infrastructure needed and the highly trained sysadmins are not. Linux won't beat Windows in corporate market precisly because it's free. Linux has it's niches and there it's strong right now, but Microsoft is after them too. Don't underestimate Microsoft. Besides, Microsoft has spend millions and millions of dollars in usability tests, the free linux distributions cannot compete with that. They don't have the resources, there are hundreds of very bright developers working on linux right now but they have to eat too, so when the "real" work gets too intense they'll drop their open source cause and devote their full time to the "pay the rent" cause. I know, been there done that.
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
-
Tomasz Sowinski wrote: So - which distro is the best? Debian. Debian's package management system is leagues ahead of any other distros. You can keep your linux system up todate with two simple commands ( easily runnable from cron ) $>apt-getupdate $>apt-getdistupgrade This will not only go out, get the latest debian package for all applications you run. For most daemon applications ( example sshd ) it will stop the daemon and start running the newer version. Jared jparsons@jparsons.org www.prism.gatech.edu/~gte477n
jparsons wrote: ( easily runnable from cron ) This 'cron' thing - is that another linux desktop? ;P Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com
- It's for protection
- Protection from what? Zee Germans? -
Eddie Velasquez wrote: I see no reason why they cannot pull it off again with their security initiatives. Number one reason. Users are stupid Jared jparsons@jparsons.org www.prism.gatech.edu/~gte477n
I agree, but it's the designer/developer responsibility to prevent the user from making stupid mistakes. Microsoft han't been fulfilling that responsibility, that's where their trustworthy computing comes into play.
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
-
Eddie, I would have agreed with your assessment maybe a year or two ago. But the issue isn't really which OS is sexier at the moment. Microsoft simply cannot compete with a free product. It's that simple. As soon as Linux becomes easier to use (a goal that is easier to achieve than MS better securing their software) then it will be "good enough" for the general public, "good enough" for business as well. The applications are already streaming in to Linux. So MS has to innovate much faster than they are doing now or else their lower TCO argument (which works right now) will become false. I believe they hire top class people and I'm an ardent admirer of their vision. But you just can't compete with "free" when the free product is high quality. Impossible. Having said that, the decision to have ASP.NET support for Apache is a brilliant move intended to help stem the tide. But it won't be enough. I think if Palladium fails to catch on, then MS could begin a steady decline in dominance. If it DOES catch on however, it's bye bye to Linux forever :-) Finish this sentence: We're movin' on up, to the top...
Senkwe Chanda wrote: Microsoft simply cannot compete with a free product. It has, it currently does, and I think it will continue to do so. The free product you're talking about requires a computer nerd at the helm for it to EVER be able to do anything more than what is in the default install. This is of course fine and dandy for server-type setups, where Microsoft could really use the competition to make them beef up their own products. Talking about Linux like it's just on the cusp of becoming useful to the mainstream makes me think of all the other times over the past 3 years or so that people have said 'linux is just on the cusp of becoming mainstream! M$ is gonna die because there's a free lunch!". I think what alot of Linux zealots seem to forget is that the vast majority of the world A) wants to use a computer for a small, specific set of tasks, and B) can't understand(and does not want to) anything more than double click this and point to that. It's these people that heavily rely on MS. And it's these people that will tell you to get bent when asked to download a package and run 'rpm -i blah -ggq -v1.3.3.99584 -boogle -run', or to use an RPM UI frontend that has one checkbox for each of a litany of command-line options. It's these people that will do little more than turn up an eyebrow when asked whether or not they want a journaling filesystem. If the OpenSource model wins out, and indeed companies like MS die, the average person will have to rely on the whims of computer nerds for their software, and large corporations will (still) be funding the vast majority of software development. I really don't see how people think that consumers will benefit when the only ways you can make money off of software is by selling 'support' for it (how many people would accuse MS of making bugs on purpose if this was their model???), or by offering custom development of it to corporations for high $$$. But, of course, we'll need a TON more lawyers to navigate the bajillions of OpenSource licenses, so the legal profession doesn't have anything to worry about ;) -- Russell Morris "WOW! Chocolate - half price!" - Homer Simpson, while in the land of chocolate.
-
Senkwe Chanda wrote: Microsoft simply cannot compete with a free product But, remember, what do you get with a "free" product? Zero, nada, zip, nothing! Doesn't work? Too bad, it was free! Maybe the linux binaries are free, but the infrastructure needed and the highly trained sysadmins are not. Linux won't beat Windows in corporate market precisly because it's free. Linux has it's niches and there it's strong right now, but Microsoft is after them too. Don't underestimate Microsoft. Besides, Microsoft has spend millions and millions of dollars in usability tests, the free linux distributions cannot compete with that. They don't have the resources, there are hundreds of very bright developers working on linux right now but they have to eat too, so when the "real" work gets too intense they'll drop their open source cause and devote their full time to the "pay the rent" cause. I know, been there done that.
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
Eddie Velasquez wrote: They don't have the resources, there are hundreds of very bright developers working on linux right now but they have to eat too, so when the "real" work gets too intense they'll drop their open source cause and devote their full time to the "pay the rent" cause Don't know if that's necessarily true for the guys hacking the kernel and the core user level apps. Miguel DeIcaza works for Ximian, Bruce Perens is at Real Networks or is that IBM? Alan Cox is at RH as are other important kernel hackers, Linus is at Transmeta etc. That's not bad. Actually MS has more to fear from the likes of IBM and Oracle. Yes, hobbyists can't compete against MS but big business can. Recently some "anonymous donor" put up $200 000 as reward for getting Linux running on an X-Box for example, it's a useless project but the idea is to hurt MS in lost revenue for X-Box games. I'd bet that "anonymous donor" is Larry "Illusion" or Scott "McSquealy". So MS is up against it. Palladium better work ;P Finish this sentence: We're movin' on up, to the top...
-
Eddie Velasquez wrote: I see no reason why they cannot pull it off again with their security initiatives. Number one reason. Users are stupid Jared jparsons@jparsons.org www.prism.gatech.edu/~gte477n
jparsons wrote: www.prism.gatech.edu/~gte477n Go Jackets! :-D -- Russell Morris "WOW! Chocolate - half price!" - Homer Simpson, while in the land of chocolate.
-
Senkwe Chanda wrote: Microsoft simply cannot compete with a free product. It has, it currently does, and I think it will continue to do so. The free product you're talking about requires a computer nerd at the helm for it to EVER be able to do anything more than what is in the default install. This is of course fine and dandy for server-type setups, where Microsoft could really use the competition to make them beef up their own products. Talking about Linux like it's just on the cusp of becoming useful to the mainstream makes me think of all the other times over the past 3 years or so that people have said 'linux is just on the cusp of becoming mainstream! M$ is gonna die because there's a free lunch!". I think what alot of Linux zealots seem to forget is that the vast majority of the world A) wants to use a computer for a small, specific set of tasks, and B) can't understand(and does not want to) anything more than double click this and point to that. It's these people that heavily rely on MS. And it's these people that will tell you to get bent when asked to download a package and run 'rpm -i blah -ggq -v1.3.3.99584 -boogle -run', or to use an RPM UI frontend that has one checkbox for each of a litany of command-line options. It's these people that will do little more than turn up an eyebrow when asked whether or not they want a journaling filesystem. If the OpenSource model wins out, and indeed companies like MS die, the average person will have to rely on the whims of computer nerds for their software, and large corporations will (still) be funding the vast majority of software development. I really don't see how people think that consumers will benefit when the only ways you can make money off of software is by selling 'support' for it (how many people would accuse MS of making bugs on purpose if this was their model???), or by offering custom development of it to corporations for high $$$. But, of course, we'll need a TON more lawyers to navigate the bajillions of OpenSource licenses, so the legal profession doesn't have anything to worry about ;) -- Russell Morris "WOW! Chocolate - half price!" - Homer Simpson, while in the land of chocolate.
I'm also against the idea of open source software with regards to the GPL. Don't get me wrong. Russell Morris wrote: I think what alot of Linux zealots seem to forget is that the vast majority of the world A) wants to use a computer for a small, specific set of tasks, and B) can't understand(and does not want to) anything more than double click this and point to that. True, but when I was back at University in 1998, I remember a friend of mine took half the semester just to get X-Windows up and running on his RH box for his final year project. Now you buy a distro put in the CD and voila. Ok maybe it's not still THAT simple on some distros but you can't deny that progress has been made. I don't like Linux zealots any more than you do, but facts are facts. I'll always prefer my brand new XP box (God I love that thing, first computer I ever bought that I actually clean regularly, hehe) but I don't see too many obstacles left for Linux to conquer. Compare Linux of 1998 to Linux of today. You have to admit there has been a great deal of improvment :-) Finish this sentence: We're movin' on up, to the top...
-
Senkwe Chanda wrote: Microsoft simply cannot compete with a free product But, remember, what do you get with a "free" product? Zero, nada, zip, nothing! Doesn't work? Too bad, it was free! Maybe the linux binaries are free, but the infrastructure needed and the highly trained sysadmins are not. Linux won't beat Windows in corporate market precisly because it's free. Linux has it's niches and there it's strong right now, but Microsoft is after them too. Don't underestimate Microsoft. Besides, Microsoft has spend millions and millions of dollars in usability tests, the free linux distributions cannot compete with that. They don't have the resources, there are hundreds of very bright developers working on linux right now but they have to eat too, so when the "real" work gets too intense they'll drop their open source cause and devote their full time to the "pay the rent" cause. I know, been there done that.
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
just FYI, not all Linux programmers are working for free. RedHat, for example, employs a bunch of developers, testers, designers, etc. -c
To explain Donald Knuth's relevance to computing is like explaining Paul's relevance to the Catholic Church. He isn't God, he isn't the Son of God, but he was sent by God to explain God to the masses.
/. #3848917 -
Senkwe Chanda wrote: Microsoft simply cannot compete with a free product But, remember, what do you get with a "free" product? Zero, nada, zip, nothing! Doesn't work? Too bad, it was free! Maybe the linux binaries are free, but the infrastructure needed and the highly trained sysadmins are not. Linux won't beat Windows in corporate market precisly because it's free. Linux has it's niches and there it's strong right now, but Microsoft is after them too. Don't underestimate Microsoft. Besides, Microsoft has spend millions and millions of dollars in usability tests, the free linux distributions cannot compete with that. They don't have the resources, there are hundreds of very bright developers working on linux right now but they have to eat too, so when the "real" work gets too intense they'll drop their open source cause and devote their full time to the "pay the rent" cause. I know, been there done that.
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
Eddie Velasquez wrote: But, remember, what do you get with a "free" product? Zero, nada, zip, nothing! Doesn't work? Too bad, How is that any different than anything that comes from Microsoft (or any other software manufacturer for that matter)? ------- signature starts "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 Please review the Legal Disclaimer in my bio. ------- signature ends
-
Eddie Velasquez wrote: They don't have the resources, there are hundreds of very bright developers working on linux right now but they have to eat too, so when the "real" work gets too intense they'll drop their open source cause and devote their full time to the "pay the rent" cause Don't know if that's necessarily true for the guys hacking the kernel and the core user level apps. Miguel DeIcaza works for Ximian, Bruce Perens is at Real Networks or is that IBM? Alan Cox is at RH as are other important kernel hackers, Linus is at Transmeta etc. That's not bad. Actually MS has more to fear from the likes of IBM and Oracle. Yes, hobbyists can't compete against MS but big business can. Recently some "anonymous donor" put up $200 000 as reward for getting Linux running on an X-Box for example, it's a useless project but the idea is to hurt MS in lost revenue for X-Box games. I'd bet that "anonymous donor" is Larry "Illusion" or Scott "McSquealy". So MS is up against it. Palladium better work ;P Finish this sentence: We're movin' on up, to the top...
Senkwe Chanda wrote: DeIcaza works for Ximian, Bruce Perens is at Real Networks or is that IBM? Alan Cox is at RH as are other important kernel hackers, Linus is at Transmeta etc. Very bright and capable people indeed, but it will take ALOT more than a handful of smart people to bring Microsoft down (with technology that is, because it would only take only one dumb judge and alot of deep pockets!)
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
-
I'm also against the idea of open source software with regards to the GPL. Don't get me wrong. Russell Morris wrote: I think what alot of Linux zealots seem to forget is that the vast majority of the world A) wants to use a computer for a small, specific set of tasks, and B) can't understand(and does not want to) anything more than double click this and point to that. True, but when I was back at University in 1998, I remember a friend of mine took half the semester just to get X-Windows up and running on his RH box for his final year project. Now you buy a distro put in the CD and voila. Ok maybe it's not still THAT simple on some distros but you can't deny that progress has been made. I don't like Linux zealots any more than you do, but facts are facts. I'll always prefer my brand new XP box (God I love that thing, first computer I ever bought that I actually clean regularly, hehe) but I don't see too many obstacles left for Linux to conquer. Compare Linux of 1998 to Linux of today. You have to admit there has been a great deal of improvment :-) Finish this sentence: We're movin' on up, to the top...
There is a HUGE difference between a student who wants to install Linux and has a resonable idea about computers and your average Joe who just got a computer to balance his checkbook. We have people stamping on mice because they think it is a foot switch. But it is true that Linux is getting easier every day. Tim Smith "Programmers are always surrounded by complexity; we can not avoid it... If our basic tool, the language in which we design and code our programs, is also complicated, the language itself becomes part of the problem rather that part of the solution." Hoare - 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture
-
jparsons wrote: ( easily runnable from cron ) This 'cron' thing - is that another linux desktop? ;P Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com
- It's for protection
- Protection from what? Zee Germans?Oh, it isn't C. Ron? Hmm... Tim Smith "Programmers are always surrounded by complexity; we can not avoid it... If our basic tool, the language in which we design and code our programs, is also complicated, the language itself becomes part of the problem rather that part of the solution." Hoare - 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture
-
just FYI, not all Linux programmers are working for free. RedHat, for example, employs a bunch of developers, testers, designers, etc. -c
To explain Donald Knuth's relevance to computing is like explaining Paul's relevance to the Catholic Church. He isn't God, he isn't the Son of God, but he was sent by God to explain God to the masses.
/. #3848917Chris Losinger wrote: not all Linux programmers are working for free. RedHat, for example, employs a bunch of developers, testers, designers, etc. I know that, but it only an handful of developers from the linux crowd that don't work for free. And it's not like the linux companies are in a very comfortable economic posicion right now. (Well the same could be said about Enron, Worldcom, etc. but I think you get my point)
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
