Linux-Advocacy Digest #935, Volume #27 Tue, 25 Jul 00 02:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Paul E. Larson)
Re: Marketplace Mysteries (Re: Hardware: budget Linux box?) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Microsoft, Linux and innovation (Zenin)
Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux (Courageous)
Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man! ("Boris")
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? (Arthur Frain)
Re: Microsoft, Linux and innovation ("Stephen S. Edwards II")
Re: Microsoft, Linux and innovation ("Mike Byrns")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man! ("Boris")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux ("kosh")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul E. Larson)
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 05:25:15 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 17:53:34 GMT, Paul E. Larson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
> wrote:
>>>On Sun, 23 Jul 2000 21:49:28 GMT, Daniel Johnson
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>>>> Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>>>[snip]
>>>>> >Yes- they are free to tie whatever they want with their software
>>>>(*including
>>>>> >a ham sandwich), and it is their right to have their product distributed
>>>>in
>>>>> >a un altered state.
>>>>>
>>>>> They are free to have that right if there motivation is benefit to the
>>>>> consumer, not if there motivation is to limit competition.
>>>>
>>>>I am pretty sure that copyright law doesn't say anything about their
>>>>*motivation*; And anyway, if being *greedy* were grounds for a
>>>
>>> Actually, the copyright clause of the US Consitution quite
>>> plainly justifies intellectual property entirely in terms
>>> of public good.
>>>
>>
>>You want to show us the clause you say is the copyright clause -
>>http://tn.areaguide.com/constitu.htm
>
>Article I, Section 8.
>
>The Congress shall have Power...
>
>....
>
>To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited
>Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective
>Writings and Discoveries;
>
And that is what you should have provided in the first place.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Subject: Re: Marketplace Mysteries (Re: Hardware: budget Linux box?)
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:18:23 -0400
Laura Goodwin wrote:
>
> > > Pricewatch doesn't seem to have any realistic prices for the K6-3 (the
> > > version with built-in cache).
>
> Yeah! What is up with that!? How come I can get an entry-level 500 mhz
> Athlon mobo/cpu for the same price as a crummy K6-111 500 cpu alone?
> That's nuts! And how come It's only 50 bucks for a K6-2 500 cpu, 50 for
> a k6-3 350, and a whopping 200+ for a K6-3 500? What the hell? Where's
> the logic? Especially with Athlons out now. Shouldn't they be giving
> away K6-3s for party
>
> BTW, which is the better buy: a $50.00 K6-3 350 cpu, or a $50.00 K6-2
> 500?
Depends. They require different motherboards..
The motherboard for the K6-2 will be cheaper, but you're going to have
to replace it on your first upgrade.
Conversely, the additional expense for the K6-3 motherboard does NOT
guarantee that you won't be replacing it.
When in doubt as to whether a piece of equipment will survive the
first round of upgrading, go for the cheaper component.
Save yourself $50 to $100, and get the faster K6-2, and then 2 years
from now, take a look around at what technology has been invented,
and upgrade based on that.
After 2 years, most motherboards are nearing obsolescence.
Therefore, it's best NOT to invest major money in them.
>
> Laura Goodwin
> "Tool Packin' Mama"
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:20:08 -0400
ZnU wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > ZnU wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Colin R. Day"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > ZnU wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Colin R. Day"
> > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > ZnU wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Linux? The OS that compsci graduates have trouble with?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What? You're kidding, right?
> > > > >
> > > > > Somewhat tongue in cheek, of course. But just about anyone will
> > > > > need to resort to large scary manuals during installation or
> > > > > configuration, which is something that just isn't necessary
> > > > > with most OSes these days.
> > > >
> > > > The only problem I had during my initial install was with the
> > > > absence of an Xresources and Xmodmap files in a particular
> > > > directory. I did read in Sam's Redhat Linux Unleashed that the
> > > > files should be in a certain directory. I copied them there and
> > > > that was that.
> > > >
> > > > I also required an entire weekend to install my SoundBlaster
> > > > Card, as I failed to read a part of the documentation that
> > > > applied to Vibra 16 cards, which cards require an unusual IRQ.
> > > >
> > > > But hey, I'm also not a grad student in comp sci.
> > >
> > > Now, how well do you think a typical computer user would deal with
> > > these issues? Most of 'em would flip out at the messages Linux
> > > displays while booting....
> >
> > They would react the same way people working on Sun and HP
> > workstations at GM do. They ignore them because the Login Screen
> > appears within a few seconds.
>
> We were talking about people installing Linux on their own machines as
> an alternative to Windows.
They would react the same way people working on Sun and HP workstations
at GM do. They completely forget about all those messages as soon
as the login screen appears.
>
> --
> The number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected.
> -- The Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June 1972
>
> ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | <http://znu.dhs.org>
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Zenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft, Linux and innovation
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 05:35:32 GMT
Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: It's like this troll. USB requires Plug 'n Play. NT doesn't have it.
: Neither does nix. An update to included PnP and USB would be stupid.
: Just like this your whole argument..
FreeBSD has had great PnP support for quite some time now, same for
Linux AFAIK. While not officially "Unix", it's close enough.
--
-Zenin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) From The Blue Camel we learn:
BSD: A psychoactive drug, popular in the 80s, probably developed at UC
Berkeley or thereabouts. Similar in many ways to the prescription-only
medication called "System V", but infinitely more useful. (Or, at least,
more fun.) The full chemical name is "Berkeley Standard Distribution".
------------------------------
From: Courageous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 05:36:32 GMT
> Tell that to the poor fool who installs Linux out
> of the box and selects medium security and ends up
> with a wide open system.
Out of the box, even on low security, having those
ports accessible is not a security problem. Out
of curiousity, does your windblows box run with
a well-known IP? Care to post it?
*smile*
C/
------------------------------
From: "Boris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man!
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 22:38:47 -0700
> I don't know PDO, but I think one of the currents in Component research is
> that message-based communications are less fragile than object->object
> interatctions. Messages are important because they can be used to define
> a contract (I give you this, you return that) independant of library
> internals. The objects can change completely, as long as the messages are
> honored.
COM in Windows 2000 (COM+) has support for publish/subscribe mechanism. Messages are
objects themselves: meaning that they are opaque; they expose certain COM interfaces
which
allow publishers/subscribers get/set properties, etc. There's definitely need for such
functionality. For example, in company I work for now publish/subscribe was implemented
for MSMQ on NT4. Having MS implement that will simplify things for Web developers.
Boris
------------------------------
From: Arthur Frain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 22:26:42 -0700
Greg Yantz wrote:
>
> Arthur Frain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> This is hydro-electric power? If it is, it rather tends
> to invalidate your whole point.
Why's that? You think hydro is dirty of something?
Clogs your wires? Actually, some of it is hydro
that was abandoned by private utilities as being
inefficient and unprofitable. But it's all hydro
(and proud of it). Washington State has a long
history of failed private hydro - I really don't
think you want to go there. OTOH, I don't know
of any law prohibiting private hydro.
I'd be interested in knowing what you think my
point is.
> Heh. I think I'd like to see an electricity provider with
> lower expenses, anywhere.
Maybe, maybe not. I'd bet it costs more to build
a Columbia River Dam than it does to build a
coal or oil fired plant of similar capacity.
Distribution costs are major capital and
operating costs too - hydro has no advantage
there. Distribution costs here are considerably
higher than most places - this is Chelan County,
WA if I didn't mention it. The customer base
is small (100K) and spread out. Over 80% of the
county is government owned, elevation ranges
from below 900 feet to over 7000 feet (actually
-400 feet at the bottom of the lake). The
distances between towns is tens of miles, the
distance between customers can be miles.
We can debate this point more if you'd like,
but I wouldn't assume that just because hydro
appears to be "free" that that's a significant
advantage - it has major costs too. At any
rate, I don't think either of us knows what
percentage of costs are allocable to fuels,
and I'd bet they're not as large as you might
believe. Other than that, the advantages are
all with private plants in densely populated
areas.
None of that makes any difference to the
point I was trying to make - in fact it
supports it.
> When was the dam (dams?) built? How was it financed?
The most recent dam (Rocky Reach) was built in the 50's
(under Eisenhower). It was financed by floating a bond
issue (repaid by operating revenues), just like most
private and public generation facilities are (and I'll
bet you thought your tax dollars paid for this stuff).
The bonds almost certainly were guaranteed by the
government, which is a slight advantage. Don't know
the bonding specifics on this dam; some have paid back
early, some right on time, a few have required
re-financing (I think Grand Coulee did), none have
defaulted AFAIK. I know they've done a bond issue
since I've been here, but I believe that was for
maintenance/capital improvements.
The other large dam (Rock Island) was, I believe
abandoned or offered for sale to the government.
I'm sure there have been improvements.
There is also a smaller dam in the Chelan Gorge
(on the Chelan River - bonus points if you can
find it on a map) and I have no idea of it's
history, but I suspect it's 50's or 60's era too.
Arthur
------------------------------
From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft, Linux and innovation
Date: 25 Jul 2000 05:43:29 GMT
Zenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: : It's like this troll. USB requires Plug 'n Play. NT doesn't have it.
: : Neither does nix. An update to included PnP and USB would be stupid.
: : Just like this your whole argument..
: FreeBSD has had great PnP support for quite some time now, same for
: Linux AFAIK. While not officially "Unix", it's close enough.
<PEDANTIC>
NetBSD actually had USB support before either FreeBSD or Linux.
</PEDANTIC>
--
.-----.
|[ ] | Stephen Edwards | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
| = :| "I'm too polite to use that word, so I'll just say,
| | 'bite me, you baboon-faced ass-scratcher.'"
|_..._| --SEGA's Seaman on the "F" word.
------------------------------
From: "Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft, Linux and innovation
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 05:46:44 GMT
You go ahead and plug every PnP card and peripheral into your BSD box that
Windows 2000 supports and have it work as well. Then you can talk about PnP
support.
"Zenin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : It's like this troll. USB requires Plug 'n Play. NT doesn't have it.
> : Neither does nix. An update to included PnP and USB would be stupid.
> : Just like this your whole argument..
>
> FreeBSD has had great PnP support for quite some time now, same for
> Linux AFAIK. While not officially "Unix", it's close enough.
>
> --
> -Zenin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) From The Blue Camel we learn:
> BSD: A psychoactive drug, popular in the 80s, probably developed at UC
> Berkeley or thereabouts. Similar in many ways to the prescription-only
> medication called "System V", but infinitely more useful. (Or, at least,
> more fun.) The full chemical name is "Berkeley Standard Distribution".
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:47:40 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Christopher Smith in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[...]
>> It is illegal to not compete with an inferior product, but to force
>> consumers to accept the inferior product in order to acquire another
>> product (in this case, also inferior, but that's beside the point).
>
>No one was forced to buy Windows, as far as I know.
That qualifier means a lot. Would this be then, a dishonest truth, or
an honest lie? Whether you know it or not, millions of people have been
forced to buy Windows, because Microsoft acted illegally to prevent
alternatives from being accessible to them.
>> Is it all anti-trust crimes which you think are "good business
>> strategies", or just tying as restraint of trade, a violation of section
>> 1 of the Sherman Act?
>
>I am not a lawyer, especially an American one, but it seems to me that your
>"Sherman Act" is unfair and based far to much on things the *might* happen
>instead of things that *did*, or *do* happen.
This is a common misconception. In fact, the Sherman Act is, in
practice, one of the "fairest" laws possible, in the end. Court
precedent has lead to no less than THREE absolutely fool-proof
no-questions-asked defenses which will immediately cause acquittal EVEN
IF YOU DID IT! And it isn't what "might" happen because of a monopoly
which is a crime; it is simply the act of monopolizing, of restraining
trade, of doing *anything* to hamper or interfere with competition.
>The whole basis around which this "anti-trust" case is based seems to me to
>be unfair and flawed. This is before we even get into all the rewritten
>history, assumptions and gaping holes in the prosecution's case.
There aren't any such fallacies as you allude to. Microsoft purposely
worked to monopolize and restrain trade. There isn't anything unclear
about it; even setting Real Media as Mark Furman isn't enough to
consider that MS might not be guilty. They admitted it themselves in
internal documentation, and have been flaunting their market dominance
more and more unguardedly for years. That they don't think what they
did was a crime, and that you don't, are really not much of an issue in
determining if what they did was a crime.
[...]
>> If it was market choice, why do I observe a bunch of restrictions placed
>> on OEMs in order to force them to bundle MS Office instead of IBM's
>> suite or Corel's suite or Star Office or any other Office suit?
>
>Such as ?
Figure it out. If its anti-competitive, they've got it. Cliff's-edge
pricing, exclusionary contracts, intimidation and outright threat are
not beyond them in forcing OEMs to bundle MS Office. You didn't think
it was popular because it is better, did you? How naive.
>> Any of
>> these might fulfill a particular customer's requirements quite easily.
>
>And they're free to get them, if it does.
Whether they are free is not the issue; whether the market is free (of
monopoly manipulation) is the issue. Pre-load exclusions, specifically,
are the issue.
[...]
>Every comparison you read between Office and other suites always acclaims
>office as the better product. Office *is* the best suite.
Bullshit. Office is the only viable office suite, as dictated by the
monopoly. That doesn't make it the "best", except at monopolizing. As
an office suite, its capabilities are, shall we say, beyond compare.
>> You'd have to be either blind or stupid to think
>> that MS "competes" with Office; they anti-compete with it, just like
>> everything else. They couldn't compete their way out of a paper bag,
>> from all appearances.
>
>Office got to the top of the heap by simply being better than every other
>suite. I doubt you'll find many people wihtout some other agenda who would
>argue that.
You've done that before. Its pretty lame. Perhaps you don't realize
how obvious it is.
I don't have any *other* agenda; I argue that Office is a piece of crap
because I don't like to see consumers ripped off. Office got to the top
of the heap with pre-loads and "forced bundling"; that was plain for
anyone to see if they merely looked. Not having the details of these
contracts (they're all NDA, of course), it couldn't be known per se
whether it was "the network effect" (ironic, considering Microsoft is
insisting in court that there's no such thing) or discriminatory sales
tactics. But that's not to say it couldn't be known, or wasn't.
"Bundle Office or Windows gets *real* expensive; and you're about due
for a licensing audit, aren't you?" It happened, no question. I
watched it occur, and described in early 1997, I think, that apparently
MS had finally started getting serious about removing competitive office
suites. And for the next year, countless mentions in conversation and
in the media of how receiving Office documents is the main reason for
being someone who sends Office documents. Because suddenly everyone
noticed that there wasn't anything left but Office documents.
Not to say this is literally true. A *lot* of people still use 1-2-3
and WordPerfect, even on 95 and 98. They're just not the kind that
attaches documents to email messages. School teachers and others who do
real work. Corporate business/marketing/sales droids always gravitate
towards the least efficient but most convenient method, so attaching
documents to email has become a convention in business.
While the details of the contracts involved in securing the pre-load
monopoly might be a bit uncertain, there's no doubt in my mind that as
far as PC software goes, MS Office bites. This is most definitely
first-hand information, not an agenda or hear-say. There aren't really
a whole lot of people that learn to *productively* use more than one
office suite; any comparison is either a check-list or an idiosyncratic
opinion. Once you've actually learned three or four (or seven to
twelve, depending on how you count) separate suites, and use them
routinely for long enough to become familiar with them, it becomes
pretty obvious that while there are other pieces of crap out there, as
an office suite, MS Office makes a good ham sandwich. Word has gotten
worse and worse since Word for Windows 2.0, and Excel took a nose-dive
soon after killing off 1-2-3. Power Point was *always* the crappiest
(and most trivial) presentation graphics program available, and still
is. All of them have good points and useful features; all of them have
major design flaws and tons of stupid ideas. Everything else you might
call "Office" is likewise either krufty piles of acquired code, or
thinly veiled lock-in mechanisms without redeeming value in practical
terms on millions upon millions of desktops. The "integration" which
makes a suite has been co-opted by the need to prevent a middleware
market from forming, and the result is IE and ILOVEYOU.
Thank heaven's they were convicted. Another few years, and Office and
Exchange would be the only desktop and server OS (respectively)
commercially available on PC hardware.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: "Boris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man!
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 22:47:45 -0700
> Oooh...you mean even newer and more exciting viruses?
Because SOAP executes on top of HTTP, it has all security mechanisms HTTP has: SSL,
etc.
SOAP was submitted as IETF standard. Besides MS it's backed by IBM and many others.
Even
Sun agreed to support it (given their *love* to MS that fact is rather meaningful).
Boris
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:55:55 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Chris Wenham in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>> > False. Certainly big names like Dell, Compaq etc weren't carrying
>> > non-Windows PCs, but that's because they cater to the majority market,
>> > and the majority market is only interested in Windows.
>>
>> No, they cater to Microsoft, who dictates licensing terms. Obviously,
>> you haven't been paying atention to the trial.
>
> They cater to the people who buy their computers, they /pander/ to
> Microsoft.
>
>Regards,
>
>Anal English Major
They cater to Microsoft, they pander to their customers /for/ Microsoft.
Regards,
Their Customers
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: "kosh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 23:54:53 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Steve
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just installed Mandrake 7.1 with medium security setting and install
> option of everything.
>
> Port 21 ftp WIDE OPEN.
>
> Port 23 telnet WIDE OPEN
>
> Port 110 pop3 WIDE OPEN
>
> Port 113 ident Wide open....
>
> Not to mention all of the other security holes due to inetd running
> every service known to mankind.
>
> Windows 98 se with ICS installed closes all of those ports and several
> are in stealth mode.
>
> No wonder the script kiddies seems to love Linsux.....
>
> Typical newbie will install it with defaults and be hacked within a
> couple of hours.
>
>
> BTW SuSE 6.4, Install Everything did somewhat better in that only ports
> 80 and 113 were open.
>
> I only checked via www.grc.com which does not check all ports.
>
> God only knows what else is wide open.....
>
> Steven
I guess you have not even looked at the manuals that came with it. When
you installed the Os it told you what that security level did. I have done
the install and read it. Also in the reference manual tarting on page
83 there is a pretty comprehensive section on security levels and how to
change them and what they mean. On my system neither telnet or ftp were
even installed.
Before blaming a dist you might want to read what it says when you install
it a little more carefully. An OS is only as secure as the person that is
running it.
Because I read what it said as it installed when my system came up the
only think that was running was openssh all other services were not
installed. I also set up my ipchains rules using a firewall config
program a few minutes later and ran MandrakeUpdate to install all updates.
All of which were very simple to do. Especially the updates. If you can't
bother to allow it to update itself then you deserve to get rooted. Since
it says in the manuals how to do it. All you do is run the program then
select all and go.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
