Linux-Advocacy Digest #754, Volume #31 Fri, 26 Jan 01 21:13:07 EST
Contents:
Re: Whistler predictions... ("Nik Simpson")
qtss - Streaming Multimedia Server (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Why can't Microsoft keep their web servers up? (Shane Phelps)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Brian V. Smith)
Re: Ramen worm/virus cracks NASA and others ("Otto")
Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe ("Chad Myers")
Re: A salutary lesson about open source (T. Max Devlin)
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) ("ono")
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (.)
Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe ("Chad Myers")
Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe ("Chad Myers")
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Grant Edwards)
Re: A salutary lesson about open source ("Chad Myers")
Re: A salutary lesson about open source ("Chad Myers")
Re: C2 [ was Ramen worm/virus cracks NASA and others ] ("Chad Myers")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance ("Chad Myers")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply-To: "Nik Simpson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Nik Simpson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler predictions...
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 20:07:36 -0500
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:94t0a8$h2d$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > As for 64 bit, if there was a differnet 64 bit version of windows out,
> they
> > might run that. But there's not.
>
> AFAIU, the difference between 32 bit & 64 bit is mainly in the HAL, NT
> itself is platform independent.
>
Well yes and no, the IA64 bit version will have its own HAL, but it will
also be ported to support 64bit cleanly, that means removing a lot of
underlying 32bit cruft as well as adding a 32bit compatibility module. So
there is quite a lot of work involved, it's not just a matter of using a
different compiler, it never is with an operating system moving to a
different natural word size.
--
Nik Simpson
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: qtss - Streaming Multimedia Server
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 01:09:22 GMT
I don't know how good it is, but I'm browsing through Debian's
dselect tool (it's a bit like rummaging around in someone's attic;
there's interesting stuff in there :-) ), and happened to notice
this entry. The blurb reads:
[begin excerpt]
Server technology which allows you to send streaming audio and video data
to clients across the Internet using theindustry standard RTP and RTSP
protocols. The source .mov file must be "hinted" for this purpose by a
Macintosh or Windows machine.
QTSS can also stream live video sent from Sorenson Broadcaster running on a
Macintosh.
[end excerpt]
I remember discussing this on COLA some days ago, so thought this
might be of general interest. :-) I don't know how well it works
or what its limitations are.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 1d:11h:21m actually running Linux.
>>> Make Signatures Fast! <<<
------------------------------
From: Shane Phelps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why can't Microsoft keep their web servers up?
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 12:09:29 +1100
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > >
> > > "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:94qcc1$9qg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > : Yes, they do. But it seems that someone is DoSing all their DNS
> > > servers, or
> > > > : spoofing them, or something. This has always been a severe weakness
> of
> > > the
> > > > : internet, and has accounted for many problems. I remember a while
> back
> > > > : someone hijacked Network Solutions DNS and was rerouting people to
> his
> > > own
> > > > : site that were trying to go to NSI.
> > > >
> > > > If Microsoft would show even the slightest inclination to use its
> > > > dominant position on the desktop for good, and to start building
> > > > robust support for *standard-compliant* IPv6 and IPSec into its
> > > > software, it could make a BIG contribution to solving this and many of
> > > > today's other Internet security problems.
> > >
> > > Are you not aware that IPSec is built into Win2k?
> > >
> > > Also, MS provides complete source to it's IPv6 implementation at:
> > >
> > > http://research.microsoft.com/msripv6/
> >
> > Oooooooh!
> >
> > Microsoft announces their development of 10-year old technology.
> >
> > I hear the M$ is feverishly working on closing the Punch-card gap.
>
> Sorry, but IPv6 is really only been finalized as a standard for a few years,
> in fact, the original RFC 1883 is dated December, 1995, but was not well
> supported by anyone. The superceding specificaiton, RFC 2460 is dated
> December, 1998 and appears to be gaining a lot of ground.
>
> Why do you exagerate so much?
>
> I don't think anyone has fully implemented IPv6 yet, though I could be
> wrong.
Solaris 8 has IPv6, but this may be a subset..
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brian V. Smith)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: 27 Jan 2001 00:54:05 GMT
In article <94ssr1$ae9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) writes:
|> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) writes:
|>
|> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Harlan Grove <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|> >>
|> >> > Maybe there's a good reason for literacy tests after all.
|> >>
|> >> Perhaps. But ill put my verbal SAT score up against yours or anyone
|> >> elses, any time.
|>
|> > You mean << I'll >> and << else's >>? ;)
|>
|> No, I meant exactly what I typed. See dejanews for my multiple arguments
|> for the granular use of capitals and contractions in informal prose.
Oh, that's *really* authoritative. It's pretty sad how lazy people have become
or ignorant of correct grammer when it comes to "prose".
--
===============================================================
Brian V. Smith ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www-epb.lbl.gov/BVSmith
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
I don't speak for LBL; they don't pay me enough for that.
Check out the xfig site at http://www-epb.lbl.gov/xfig
To the optimist, the glass is half full. To the pessimist, the
glass is half empty. To the engineer, the glass is twice as big
as it needs to be.
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Otto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Otto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Ramen worm/virus cracks NASA and others
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 01:16:52 GMT
"Aaron Ginn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: "Conrad Rutherford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
:
: > http://betanews.efront.com/article.php3?sid=980449212
: >
: > Kaspersky Lab's is now reporting that the Linux-based virus 'Ramen' is
now
: > "in the wild." The firm sent word around the net today that several Web
: > sites have now been defaced by the malicious code, enough to up its
status
: > to "in the wild". Places affected by the bug include NASA, Texas A&M,
and
: > Supermicro. As of right now, the worm only seems to be affecting Redhat
6.2
: > and 7.0 versions of Linux.
:
:
: IOW, not Linux. Red Hat Linux, specifically unpatched Red Hat Linux.
The worm also contains routines that intend to attack FreeBSD and SuSE
machines, but these routines are neither activated, nor used in worm code.
Just wait couple of days for the activation....
:
:
: > Using three known breachable security exploits in the operating system,
: > Ramen can penetrate the system and take over root access to execute its
: > payload.
: >
: > One executive at Russia-based Kaspersky Labs told reporters "The
discovery
: > of the Ramen worm 'in-the-wild' is a very significant moment in computer
: > history. Previously considered as an absolutely secured operating
system,
: > Linux now has become yet another victim to computer malware."
:
:
: No OS is secure if the administrators ignore sercurity patches. There
: are all kinds of Red Hat servers that are unaffected because they have
: been properly administered.
True, conversely if the administrator does not ignore security patches, then
any OS can be secured against known exploits.
: > Perhaps the most unsettling piece of this puzzle is that Redhat has
known
: > about the problem for more than six months.
:
:
: Wow, guess what? Red Hat has had fixes for over 4 months. What are
: they supposed to do, personally visit every site that uses Red Hat and
: make sure the fixes have been installed?
Although that's also true, but Red Hat should've fixed it in the version
7.0.
: So which is it? Is Linux a hacker's toy that no one uses, or is it a
: widely deployed server-class OS?
It's a toy which not many people know how to play with....
Otto
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 01:03:56 GMT
"kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> hence, Microsoft has a agenda to ensure that it works....FUCK THE COST AND
> MESS! MAKE IT WORK!....the words of win-zombies over-lord, Bill Gates.
>
> kiwiunixman
Ah yes, the ever-present Penguinista voice of reason.
-Chad
>
> "Conrad Rutherford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:3a6ec863$0$45732$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:94lfh7$ur$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > I've actually talked to some inside Microsoft people, and Microsoft
> > actually
> > > sponsered the roll out etc, hence, not really a sign that Windows is
> > > superior, just shows how much marketing and con-job muscle Microsoft
> has.
> > >
> >
> > I've talked to some people involved in the roll out and it was supported
> by
> > MS but hardly sponsored.
> >
> >
>
>
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A salutary lesson about open source
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 01:20:00 GMT
Said Chad Myers in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 23 Jan 2001 13:57:28
[...]
>Start a new thread, I told you. This thread is talking about Fortune 500.
On Chadder-heads point that the Fortune 500 is worth considering, there
seems to be somebody with some credentials who sounds like he agrees
with Chad. Even more to the point, however, wouldn't how the Fortune
100 are spending their web dollars be instructive? Apparently, someone
thinks so.
=================================================================
http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,41454,00.html
But most security experts agree that the network configuration problems
that were revealed by Microsoft's original blackout are far more serious
than the company's later fall to DoS attacks.
Microsoft itself seems to agree with those sentiments, and has
evidently asked for help in managing its DNS records. DNS (domain name
system) servers are analogous to an Internet business phone book: They
translate computer names into the numbers that are needed to actually
access the computer.
Greg Keefe, the owner and operator of DNS service provider
HammerNode.com, noted that the company had "frantically off-loaded the
management of their DNS to another company today."
"I simply can't respect that move coming from a Fortune 100 company
that develops and sells DNS software as part of their core business,"
added Keefe.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: "ono" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 02:10:50 +0100
"> > I'm interrested too. Would be fun to have something to compile into my
apps
> > that is actually capable of crashing W2K.
> > btw: I actually crashed a few boxes but the I'm the one writing the
kernel
> > drivers so everybody knew it was me ;-).
>
> Translation: Ono admits he's on the Microsoft payroll.
?????
Yeah sure, they pay me more in a day then anybody will pay you in a
lifetime.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: 27 Jan 2001 01:23:39 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Brian V. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <94ssr1$ae9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) writes:
> |> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> |> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) writes:
> |>
> |> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Harlan Grove <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> |> >>
> |> >> > Maybe there's a good reason for literacy tests after all.
> |> >>
> |> >> Perhaps. But ill put my verbal SAT score up against yours or anyone
> |> >> elses, any time.
> |>
> |> > You mean << I'll >> and << else's >>? ;)
> |>
> |> No, I meant exactly what I typed. See dejanews for my multiple arguments
> |> for the granular use of capitals and contractions in informal prose.
> Oh, that's *really* authoritative. It's pretty sad how lazy people have become
> or ignorant of correct grammer when it comes to "prose".
"grammar".
=====.
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 01:08:47 GMT
"Shane Phelps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> > "Shane Phelps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > >
> > > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Shane Phelps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >
> > > > > Where's the URL mentioning that MS deliberately introduces instability
> > > > > into the
> > > > > non-server versions?
> > > >
> > > > Check MS' 99.999% page, search for "stability tax".
> > >
> > > I just tried. I can get to www.microsoft.com, but I get a DNS failure
> > > when I try to search :-(
> > >
> > > Can you summarise it for me or provide the URL for the 99.999% page
> > please?
> >
> > http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/guide/server/solutions/overview/reliabl
> > e/default.asp
> >
> > "And the three offerings in the family-Windows 2000 Server, Advanced Server,
> > and Datacenter Server-allow you to tailor your investment to provide the
> > level of system availability that's appropriate for your various business
> > operations, without overbuying for situations that don't require maximum
> > uptime."
> >
> > Tell me what this tells you?
>
> Ayende,
>
> Thank you for the effort you've put into this response.
> It's good to see somebody from either camp who can advocate without
> mud-slinging or name-calling.
> [it's been one of those days :-(]
>
> For your information, I don't really think Microsoft deliberately introduces
> instability into the non-server versions of their products. That was
> just a rhetorical question in response to Chad's assertion that *workstation*
> reliability is invalid.
Typical Penguinista spin.
The person who posed that was posing it as though it was the end all be
all of stability on Windows. That was a benchmark of a desktop workstation
in a workstation environment under workstation conditions. Servers are
kept in more reliable situations (better hardware, better physical
environment, etc), with better trained, better paid staff watching
over them. Uptime is consierably higher in this situation.
Using the workstation numbers to judge the stability of Win2K server
is assinine at best.
> I actually agree that NT servers will be more stable
> than desktop boxes, but Chad came at it entirely the wrong way :-)
It was obvious what I said to anyone who had a clue. The fact that that
kind of ignorant idea was put forth in the first place should be
embarassing to your side of the camp.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 01:09:17 GMT
"Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:94sfcq$i7m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> : news:94qdeg$13mm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> :> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> :>
> :> : "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> :> : news:94nnig$8o8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> :> :>
> :> :> I don't need to see it. It isn't possible to get better than 100%.
> :> :> EVERYTHING in Unix is remotable. The best anyone can do is to match
> :> :> that, but it isn't physically possible to actually beat it.
> :>
> :> : Windows Terminal Services + Microsoft Management Console provides
> :> : better than telnet remotability.
> :>
> :> That's nice. Now wake up and look at the calender. UNIX *also*
> :> provides better than telnet remotability.
>
> : Not really. They're all variations of telnet (SSH, etc). Some
> : of their applications have web-based administration components
> : which are usually horribly slow and semi-broken.
>
> : Nothing like MMC or the speed of WTS.
>
> Well, you can live in your own little world if you like.
Have you ever used MMC or seen the power of it?
Obviously not.
Do you even know what it is?
-Chad
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Edwards)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 01:30:01 GMT
>> |> >> > Maybe there's a good reason for literacy tests after all.
>> |> >>
>> |> >> Perhaps. But ill put my verbal SAT score up against yours or anyone
>> |> >> elses, any time.
>> |>
>> |> > You mean << I'll >> and << else's >>? ;)
>> |>
>> |> No, I meant exactly what I typed. See dejanews for my multiple arguments
>> |> for the granular use of capitals and contractions in informal prose.
>
>> Oh, that's *really* authoritative. It's pretty sad how lazy people have become
>> or ignorant of correct grammer when it comes to "prose".
>
>"grammar".
Now, if somebody would compare Bill Gates to Hitler, we can officially
declare this thread deceased.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! I Know A Joke!!
at
visi.com
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A salutary lesson about open source
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 01:14:47 GMT
"Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:94sevm$i7m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : So you would deny that Dell obtains a significant, if not
> : majority of their revenue from the web? (If you would,
> : you'd be wrong).
>
> You weren't talking about just Dell. You were talking about
> the entire Fortune 500. Dell is not a typical representative
> of the Fortine 500. You are so fscking dishonest.
Ah, so now everything has to fit into your narrow view of
what is "representative"?
You said it wasn't, I showed you were wrong, now you change
the goal lines again.
Would you consider Merril Lynch, Fidelity, Hewlett-Packard,
Compaq, MCI, Morgan Stanely Dean Witter, Motorola, Intel,
Ingram Micro, Time Warner, and Microsoft representative?
Those are all companies from the Top 100 of the Fortune
500 list. These are all companies who have huge stakes
in the web. They also have revenues over $19million.
There are many more which I didn't mention.
So, just admit you're wrong and let's move on.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A salutary lesson about open source
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 01:15:24 GMT
"Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:94sf1j$i7m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : "The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message
> :>
> :> Personally, I think VBScript would be incredibly easy to use and
> :> learn for projects of, oh, say, about 5 lines or less.
> :> But it gets weird quickly, IMO. :-) For example: how does one
> :> declare a class with public, protected, and private data
> :> members, inheriting from another class? Java and C++ can
> :> handle this without difficulty; I think Perl 5 can, too.
>
> : VBScript is... well, a scripting language.
>
> So is Perl, and *it* can do it.
Ok, so? I never said it didn't. Perl is great, don't get me wrong.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: C2 [ was Ramen worm/virus cracks NASA and others ]
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 01:19:23 GMT
"Shane Phelps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I love it when "Jan" and "Conrad" play tag-team :-)
>
> Jan Johanson wrote:
> >
> > "Shane Phelps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > >
> > > Conrad Rutherford wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:94q17o$13p$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Conrad Rutherford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > http://betanews.efront.com/article.php3?sid=980449212
> > > > >
> > > > > > Kaspersky Lab's is now reporting that the Linux-based virus 'Ramen'
> > is
> > > > now
> > > > > > "in the wild." The firm sent word around the net today that several
> > Web
> > > > > > sites have now been defaced by the malicious code, enough to up its
> > > > status
> > > > > > to "in the wild". Places affected by the bug include NASA, Texas
> > A&M,
> > > > and
> > > > > > Supermicro. As of right now, the worm only seems to be affecting
> > Redhat
> > > > 6.2
> > > > > > and 7.0 versions of Linux.
> > > > > > Using three known breachable security exploits in the operating
> > system,
> > > > > > Ramen can penetrate the system and take over root access to execute
> > its
> > > > > > payload.
> > > > >
> > > > > > One executive at Russia-based Kaspersky Labs told reporters "The
> > > > discovery
> > > > > > of the Ramen worm 'in-the-wild' is a very significant moment in
> > computer
> > > > > > history. Previously considered as an absolutely secured operating
> > > > system,
> > > > > > Linux now has become yet another victim to computer malware."
> > > > >
> > > > > No, it was never considered 'absolutely secure' by ANYONE. It is
> > highly
> > > > > securable. Theres a difference.
> > > >
> > > > But it can't even reach C2 level of security... NT is more "highly
> > > > securable" the NSA says...
> > >
> > >
> > > NT 3.51 on a Compaq box with no network connection or floppy drive was C2.
> > > I don't believe NT 4 or 5 were ever C2 certified in *any* configuration
> > > but I may be wrong.
> >
> > You are wrong. NT4 was C2 certified with both a floppy and network
> > connection.
> >
>
> I wasn't aware of that. Thanks for the update. URL please?
> Oh, don't bother about the URL - I see it down the bottom
>
> > >
> > > http://www.swynk.com/friends/sasha/tocs.asp
> > > has information on how to configure NT 4 to C2 level, but I don't believe
> > > MS has aver had a system certified to Orange Book C2, let alone Red Book.
> >
> > NT4 has been certified at C2 level. No personal OS has ever made Red.
>
> Que? Red *is* networked. Orange is standalone. Are you talking about NT4
Server?
> Is there really such a thing as a "personal" OS? Did you mean workstation?
>
> >
> > >
> > > NT's use of ACLs and fascist logging (when enabled) make it potentially
> > > quite secure. Please don't muddy the waters by claiming *all* NT is C2.
> > > NT 4 and 5 are claimed to be substantially different from NT 3.51.
> >
> > True, NT5 has not been certified, yet. NT4 with networking has.
> >
>
> Certification would have to take a while. Sun still have Trusted Solaris 8
> jumping through the certification hoops as well (C2 + B1).
>
> > >
> > > Unless the situation has changed substantially, C2 certification is issued
> > > to a system configuration (hardware + software), not an OS. Even
> > installing
> > > a SCSI hard disk in addition to the IDE disk a system is certified with
> > > will invalidate the original certification.
> >
> > The OS is certified, not the hardware, however the hardware is documented.
> > You'll note than when describing the certification and process, hardware is
> > not part of the process. C2 is not about hardware. Changing hard drive type
> > will not invalidate this configuration (think about it eh? If I ghost from a
> > SCSI to IDE drive - how is this less secure?)
> >
> > SO, read and remember - certification is for the OS, NOT the hardware.
> >
> > http://www.radium.ncsc.mil./tpep/epl/entries/TTAP-CSC-EPL-99-001.html
>
>
> The earlier C2 stuff I saw around the time of the NT 3.5 certification
> and much of the later material indicated that it's the *system*, not the
> OS or hardware which is certified. For example, is a dual-boot PC
> (Linux and NT 4) C2?
> I guess they were reading more into C2 than it really covers.
C2 does cover the system, of which the OS is a major part.
The system part just covers being able to lock the case, having
a shut-off switch if the cover is open, monitoring when
the cover has been opened and a few other minor items.
The major part of the testing is the OS and how it handles
security and multiple users on the system.
I believe NT is certified on several different hardware platforms,
all of which are available to the average joe (mainly through
Compaq). One could buy similar hardware to the boxes tested and,
while not technically C2, you could obtain the level of security
tested in the C2 certification because, as I stated before,
the OS is the main focus of the certification.
-Chad
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 01:34:51 GMT
Charlie Ebert writes:
> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>>> [nothing intelligent]
>> THOLEN!
>> JUST GO JUMP IN THE GODDAMNED VOLCANO, YOU MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT!
> tholen is definitely mentally sick.
On what basis do you make that ridiculous and unsubstantiated claim?
> He's been doing this since the early 90's.
Doing what? There wasn't anything above that I did.
> Perhaps earlier than that.
You're presupposing that I did something above.
> I do not understand why anybody would waste their
> time with this crap for a decade or more
What alleged crap? Or are you referring to Kulkis' response?
> when they could just kill themselves and be
> done with their worthless miserable lives?
Are you planning a demonstration?
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 01:20:31 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:94s88j$11i$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Chad Myers wrote:
> >>
> >> > P.S.- sponsoring an independant benchmark does not necessarily
> >> > taint the findings.
> >>
> >> Hint: "sponsored" and "independent" clash.
>
> > Then you have no idea how the scientific world works. All studies
> > are sponsored by someone, but it doesn't affect the outcome of
> > the study.
>
> Then you have never been involved in the 'scientific world'.
>
> I have. I was involved in radon research in the late 80s-early90s
> in northeastern pennsylvania.
>
> I can tell you that under no uncertian terms, sponsorship absolutely
> affects the outcome of these studies.
Ah yes, anecdotal qualified evidence. Suddenly, this makes everything
ok.
Whatever.
Have you ever taken an aspirin? I'm sure you probably take Zoloft
or Prozac (or maybe you aren't, which is why you are this way?)
-Chad
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
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
******************************
