Linux-Advocacy Digest #284, Volume #32 Sun, 18 Feb 01 06:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Interesting article (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Interesting article (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Another Pete Goodwin "Oopsie"! (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: How Microsoft Crushes the Hearts of Trolls. (Aaron Kulkis)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 05:55:19 -0500
Steve Mading wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : Steve Mading wrote:
> :>
> :> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> :>
> :> : No, really, I want to know.
> :>
> :> : When it's good for Linux, Linux is Unix. When it's bad for Linux,
> :> : Linux isn't Unix.
> :>
> :> Bull. There are many Unixen, of which Linux is one in every
> :> way except the legal trademark way. This is very simple, and
> :> very consistent. When speaking on technical issues, Linux is
> :> one of the Unixes. When speaking on legal or corporate issues,
> :> (trademark discussions, or discussing how "unix companies" tend
> :> to act) it is not.
> :>
> :> Now, speaking on technical issues, both statements: "Linux is Unix"
> :> and "Linux is not UNIX" don't really fit 100%. UNIX is a set of
> :> OSes, ONE of which is Linux. Niether sentence tells the whole
> :> story. You are comparing a set to a scalar. This might be why
> :> you are confused on this very simple issue. That's why
> :> I was careful to phrase it as "Linux is ONE OF THE Unixen".
> :> But English is a sloppy language, where it is *sometimes* acceptable
> :> to say "A is B" when you really mean "A is a subset of B"
> :> (Example, "a bannana is fruit". This is because nouns sometimes
> :> are treated like objects and sometimes like classes, depending
> :> on context. UNIX is such a noun.)
>
> : Actually, a better way to put it is:
>
> [snip ascii art. Wow - an asciified Ven Diagram.]
>
> The Venn Diagram doesn't really tell the picture well, though
> because "UNIX" isn't at the same level in the taxonomy as
> Linux. It's a set of OSes, one level above the OS level.
> Comparing UNIX to Linux isn't like comparing apples and oranges.
> It's more like comparing a scalar to a set.
More like comparing one simple Set to a Set of Sets.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "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"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 05:58:30 -0500
Tom Wilson wrote:
>
> In article <N_Ij6.30934$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad Myers"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:BlGj6.51$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> In article <MFFj6.45899$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad
> >> Myers"
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> > news:kEEj6.69$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> In article <hFlj6.41815$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad
> >> >> Myers"
> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >> > news:96jg3p$9hn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >> >> news:MEaj6.27470$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> < Perm bits
> >> >> >> > are ancient, a poor design, and are really unsecure.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Describ a way to get over permissions in any *nix that implement
> >> >> >> perm bits
> >> >> >> (all of them).
> >> >> >
> >> >> > You're not understanding what I'm saying...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > It's the mentality. Permission bits are extremely limiting, as
> >> >> > they only allow one owner, one group, and everyone else.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Secondly, permissions are not applied pervasively. That is,
> >> >> > they're only applied to files and file/devices. You can't set an
> >> >> > ACL on whether or not someone can access a specific porition of a
> >> >> > file, you can't set permissions on whether or not a particular
> >> >> > process can perform specific functions with the OS.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Secondly, this is a little off of perm bits, but related, there's
> >> >> > almost no auditing, or not serious auditing in Linux, for example
> >> >> > and in many Unixes. The Unixes that have DAC have a full auditing
> >> >> > scheme. In fact, that's a requirement of DAC is to verify that
> >> >> > permissions are applied properly and that users are not
> >> >> > circumventing the intent of the permissions.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Perm bits, as agreed by anyone who has a basic understanding of
> >> >> > secure OS implementations, are kindergarten-level, and are
> >> >> > insecure by nature.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > -Chad
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> I'll post Mr Rahien's question again....
> >> >>
> >> >> " Describ a way to get over permissions in any *nix that implement
> >> >> perm
> >> >> bits (all of them). "
> >> >>
> >> >> ...as I noticed you ignored it in your first response.
> >> >
> >> > I replied to it. Don't you read posts?
> >> >
> >> > You're thinking at two low of a level. If you say that only X has
> >> > permissions to a file, then only X has permission to a file. I'm not
> >> > saying that that is broken or something. I'm saying, however, that
> >> > perm bits are too limiting, and they do not provide ample control,
> >> > nor reporting, nor auditing, nor inheritance, nor explit denies, nor
> >> > any of the basic concepts of modern security. It's a 70's
> >> > architecture that some undereducated head-in-the-sand individuals
> >> > seem to not want to let go.
> >> >
> >> > Even the major Unix vendors have seen how bad perm bits are and have
> >> > developed their own DAC implementations for the security concious.
> >>
> >> If such were the case, permission bits would have been relegated to the
> >> history books long ago.
> >
> > So would've many things in Unix. But like many things in Unix, there are
> > some die-hards out there that won't see the light and refuse to let it
> > go. It's kind of a "can't teach and old dog new tricks" type thing.
> >
> > Likewise, if DAC wasn't really that good, then they wouldn't have spent
> > much time or effort developing for it.
>
> And if permission bits weren't effective they wouldn't be used at all.
> These "die-hards" you speak of don't hold on to a thing so long if it
> doesn't work. As far as "new tricks" are concerned. New doesn't always equate to
> better. And it certainly isn't as if they are afraid of learning
> something new. UNIX is sufficiently complex enough that, people who have the
> ability to master it, are most certainly not afraid or unable to learn something
> else. I've seen some of the "gurus" do things with permission bits that
> left me shaking my head in wonderment.
The ONLY reason Unix has ACL's is because they are specifically cited
in the Orange Book for use by federal US intelligence agencies.
For the actual working requirements of these organizations, permission
bits CAN do the job...but the Orange Book specifies that the security
be done by the ACL method.
>
> >
> >> In all but the most demanding cases, permission bits do quite well and
> >> therefore are still used. Three forths of what you described just plain
> >> isn't neccesary for most installations.
> >
> > Hmm, I don't know. When I've set up boxes before and I have shared and
> > complex directory systems for marketing, sales, product development, etc
> > It always seems that one group needs access to something in another
> > group's folder, etc. Most of these schemes involved allowing several
> > groups access to a folder and possibly denying one person or several
> > individuals for special situations, and then setting inheritence on sub
> > folders to prevent sub-folder permission wrangling.
> >
> >> Anyway, why do you persist in lumping anything pre 90's into the waste
> >> bin?
> >
> > Not anything, just inferior things, like permission bits and telnet.
>
> Telnet is one component that i'll agree on. if only from a security
> standpoint and its' shortcomings were answered by ssh.
>
> --
> Tom Wilson
> Sunbelt Software Solutions
> Presently lurking in his Linux Partition
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "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"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 05:59:42 -0500
Brent R wrote:
>
> petilon wrote:
> >
> > After killing innovation in the web browser market by distributing
> > IE for free, Microsoft is now calling Linux a "threat to innovation"
> > because it is being distributed for free.
>
> <sarcasm>Because God knows how much better browsers would be if we all
> had to pay money for them.</sarcasm>.
>
> Your statement is doubly odd because IE is hands-down the best browser
> out there (that I know of).
Shows how much you DON'T know.
>
> > "There is always something enamoring about thinking you can get
> > something for free." says Jim Allchin of Microsoft.
> >
> > Read the outrageous story at:
> > http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-4833927.html?tag=owv
>
> --
>
> Happy Trails
>
> -Brent
> =============================
> http://rotten168.home.att.net
> =============================
> ICQ# 51265871
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "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"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Pete Goodwin "Oopsie"!
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 06:03:36 -0500
Steve Mading wrote:
>
> Joseph T. Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : Rob S. Wolfram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : : Joseph T. Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : :>
> : :>while the solutions are completely intuitive and natural to someone
> : :>with Linux experience, they may not be to someone who's unable or
> : :>unwilling to learn. If we want Linux to be usable by these people,
> : : ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> : :>then we need to find and smooth out these sorts of rough edges.
>
> : : Personally, I don't want Linux to be usable to people who are unwilling
> : : to learn. For that matter, I don't want *anything* to be usable to
> : : people who are unwilling to learn. The amount of learning we can discuss
> : : about.
>
> : But then we can forget about Linux or other free software becoming
> : much more "mainstream" than it is now. And, along with that, the
> : cooperation from hardware vendors, etc.
>
> My $0.02: I wouldn't care if Linux remained unpopular outside
> the computer geek community if it weren't for the fact that MS is
> so dictatorial that the only way for Linux to live is for MS
> to lose something. I don't hate MS because they are popular. I
> hate them because they want to destroy my favorite toy, so to
> speak.
They want to destroy EVERYTHING that isn't M$.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "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"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: How Microsoft Crushes the Hearts of Trolls.
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 06:05:02 -0500
Marten Kemp wrote:
>
> Aaron Kulkis wrote:
> >
> <<<snip>>>
> >
> > Actually, EBCDIC persists for the same reason COBOL does.
> >
> > The so-called "Dusty-deck" problem.
> >
> > Nobody wants to rewrite the code to use ASCII.
> >
> > IBM would be doing their customers a favor by making it easier
> > to migrate to ASCII by making dual-mode (EBCDIC & ASCII) printers.
> >
> > The problem is this...you have code that works on some database.
> > It's all written for EBCDIC.
> >
> > If you convert even ONE program to ASCII, then you have to convert
> > EVERYTHING...that program *and* the database *and* EVERY SINGLE OTHER
> > PROGRAM THAT INTERACTS WITH THAT DATABASE.
> >
> > Normally, there is just WAY too much chaos as is, without introducing
> > a character-set conversion as well.
> >
>
> One of the very few built-in limitations of the original S/360
> Principles of Operation was that there weren't any unassigned control
> mode bits in the Program Status Word. The EBCDIC/ASCII mode bit was
> redefined to provide Extended Control mode for virtual storage
> operation. Before that everything was real storage like the original
> 8088. But I digress. ASCII/EBCDIC isn't too hard a translation. For an
> EBCDIC database, compile the program with an EBCDIC-speaking compiler.
> To perform queries with an ASCII terminal, translate the keystrokes.
> There may even be ASCII mode selection bits in the latest version of the
> mainframes for all I know (my detailed knowledge of the POO manuals
> stops with the S/370, which are several generations old by now).
> -- Marten Kemp
True...but try rewriting 30-year old COBOL code that was written
explicitly for EBCDIC.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "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"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
