Linux-Advocacy Digest #341, Volume #32 Tue, 20 Feb 01 02:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited (Andrew J. Brehm)
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) ("nuxx")
Re: The Windows guy. ("Tom Wilson")
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ] ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Linux web pads? (Ian Pulsford)
Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited (John Jensen)
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell ("B.B.")
Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited (Donald R. McGregor)
Re: Microsoft says Linux threatens innovation (Ed Allen)
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) ("nuxx")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew J. Brehm)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 06:43:45 +0100
ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <1ep4495.1qy899vihafh2N@[192.168.0.142]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew J. Brehm) wrote:
>
> > ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > What is the problem with releasing the entire project under the
> > > > GPL as opposed to releasing it under a BSD license?
> > >
> > > Some people don't like the restrictions of GPL.
> >
> > I see no restrictions but the needed ones.
>
> Why are the larger work licensing restrictions needed? As I pointed out,
> the BSD OSes get by just fine without a viral license. People give back
> because they want to or because it benefits them in some way, not
> because the license requires it.
RMS gives a good reason.
http://www.gnu.org/philosopy/pragmatic.html
> > > > A legal right he has, a moral right I don't know.
> > >
> > > I don't see why someone who has invested time/money in creating
> > > something shouldn't be allowed to sell it at a profit.
> >
> > We can talk about "selling it", and in fact this was often done.
> > However most software is not sold but licensed, and in contrast to a
> > person selling a chair, the vendor does not lose the property he is
> > allegedly "selling".
>
> Licensing software is no different from selling a book or any other item
> which is essentially free to manufacture but has a high development cost.
Books are not really sold. If they were, they would be my property to do
as I please with after I bought them.
Even if something is free to manufacture, selling it will STILL result
in your losing the object you are selling. Thus software is licensed,
not sold.
> > > > > GPL does not permit linking proprietary software against GPLed
> > > > > libraries. This would make things tricky.
> > > >
> > > > Use the lesser GPL.
> > >
> > > But then Apple can't mix in GPL code, so what's the point?
> >
> > I don't see why Darwin could not be released under the GPL as well.
>
> It could, but this would provide no benefit to Apple, since Apple
> couldn't incorporate changes to the GPLed version into OS X. The GPLed
> version would probably fork off and end up as a totally separate OS with
> a different community built around it.
I don't see why a GPLed Darwin could not be used in OS. Which part is
linked into the kernel?
--
Fan of Woody Allen
PowerPC User
Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza
------------------------------
From: "nuxx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 13:53:28 +0800
"mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> nuxx wrote:
> > Wrong. I have a production NT4 database server that has been up for
over 6
> > months and counting. There are no memory leaks in the kernel.
>
> Microsoft funded tests prove that this is either incorrect or very lucky.
> --
> http://www.mohawksoft.com
No luck about it. If you apply datacentre type methodologies in design and
change control as you would with any Unix server, NT is very reliable. Some
Oracle processes tend to leak memory which would eventually cause a problem
but they are killed and re-started for cold backup purposes on my systems,
so the OS stays up all the time. Recent hardware used is stock Intel server
boards with Adaptec hardware RAID. No BSODs, no crashes, nothing special.
nuxx.
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 06:06:34 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Karel
Jansens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "mlw"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Karel Jansens wrote:
>>>
>>> In article <01c09a0f$128ea8a0$28ac8bd4@nigel-laptop>, "Nigel"
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>> >> MS-DOS..no.
>>> >>
>>> >> Digital Research's DR-DOS..yes.
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > Wasn't DR's multitasking version of dos called concurrent dos and
>>> > sold separately to the single tasking standard DR-DOS?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> Concurrent DOS was IIRC a different product, which required specially
>>> compiled applications.
>>
>> No, Concurrent DOS could multitask standard applications. It used the
>> 386 virtual real mode environment to do so. I still have a licenced
>> copy
>> "somewhere."
>>
> Oops! That'll teach me. The rest of my post should be 'reasonably'
> accurate (I went through all DR-DOS, Novell DOS and OpenDOS versions,
> from 5 to 7). I really liked the product, it was even able to give me
> XMS memory on a 286 (only worked with certain motherboards though)!
That's right. I had a Zenith Z-248 (Backplaned 286-12Mhz) it would
actually emulate XMS for. (4MB worth)
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
Presently lurking in his Linux Partition
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 01:21:02 -0500
nuxx wrote:
>
> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > nuxx wrote:
> > > Wrong. I have a production NT4 database server that has been up for
> over 6
> > > months and counting. There are no memory leaks in the kernel.
> >
> > Microsoft funded tests prove that this is either incorrect or very lucky.
> > --
> > http://www.mohawksoft.com
>
> No luck about it. If you apply datacentre type methodologies in design and
> change control as you would with any Unix server, NT is very reliable. Some
Translation: most NT Admins and MCSE's are shit-heads.
> Oracle processes tend to leak memory which would eventually cause a problem
> but they are killed and re-started for cold backup purposes on my systems,
> so the OS stays up all the time. Recent hardware used is stock Intel server
> boards with Adaptec hardware RAID. No BSODs, no crashes, nothing special.
>
> nuxx.
--
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: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.security.ssh
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 06:22:44 GMT
Just on the off chance that he's killfiled Aaron, i'll respond since i'm
sure I haven't made it to his list yet.
(Inoffensive lil' me <g>)
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
Presently lurking in his Linux Partition
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>> Chad Myers wrote:
>> >
>> > So far, no one has refuted my claims (which were basically that SSH
>> > isn't secure and there are several exploitable vulnerabilities which
>> > exist on a large number of installed SSH hosts). They continue to
>> > bash me, call me names, and other infantile behaviors, but no one has
>> > addressed these issues.
>>
>> Too bad this asshole has killfiled me (so he claims), so that he cannot
>> read this rebuttal.
>
> Now he is....heheheheh
>
>
>>
>> My source is Maximum Linux Security, Ch. 10.
>>
>> The main points:
>>
>> Secure Shell supports several algorithms, including
>>
>> Blowfish: http://www.counterpane.com/blowfish.html Triple DES:
>> http://www.itl.nist.gov/div897/pubs/fip46-2.htm IDEA:
>> http://www.nixu.fi/~pnr/netsec-lopulliset/1-0-practical-crypto.html#idea
>>
>> RSA: http://www.rsa.com
>>
>> and others. The idea is that flawed algorithms can be replaced without
>> altering ssh's core protocol.
>>
>> The author then goes into great detail on installation and
>> configuration, including a host of options that telnetd does not have.
>>
>> He talks about the companion program, scp, for secure copying. He talks
>> about Tera Term Pro + TTSSH for Windows. He talks about using it on the
>> Macintosh. He compares a telent session and an ssh session as seen by a
>> network sniffer.
>>
>> Ssh can encrypt and X-Windows exchange. An extension will allow ssh to
>> provide secure RPC sessions, useful in protecting NIS (the old yellow
>> pages):
>>
>> ftp://ftp.tu-chemnitz.de/pub/Local/informatik/sec_rpc/README.RPC
>>
>> PPP can be tunnelled between two networks atop standard ssh connections
>> for a quick-and-dirty VPN.
>>
>> TCP forwarding options allow one to use it to communicate with outside
>> entities from behind a firewall.
>>
>> Finally, he talks about ssh's significant security history, including
>> buffer overflows and allowing users with expired accounts to initiate a
>> session. "However, these problems were relatively minor and were
>> eliminated in recent releases." In 1998, there was a buffer overflow in
>> a Debian implementation.
>>
>> I'm looking at page 194 of Hacking Exposed, 2nd edition:
>> "As this edition went to press, an NT/2000-compatible SSH server
>> was just released at
>>
>> http://marvin.criadvantage/caspian/Software/SSHD-NT/default.php
>>
>> Secure Shell has been a mainstay of secure remote management on
>> UNIX-based systems for many years, and it will be interesting to see if
>> this new distribution will prove a robust command-line alternative to
>> Terminal Server for remote management of NT/2000."
>>
>> Otherwise, this book talks about ssh only for the protection affords,
>> not for its vulnerabilities.
>>
>> > If this is how security issues are addressed in the Unix word, I
>> > thank God I only use Windows for the most part.
>> >
>> > Keep your head in the sand for all I care, it just shows your glaring
>> > ignorance.
>>
>> The sad part is that, even those who have not been killfiled by Chad
>> Myers cannot penetrate Chad's thick shell of ignorance, arrogance,
>> contumely, contempt, childishness, and the great out-of-datedness of
>> the information he claims to have imbibed, which no one else, somehow,
>> knows about.
>>
>> But maybe some do penetrate it... and that's why he killfiles them,
>> complete with *sigh* markers.
>>
>> Chris
>
------------------------------
From: Ian Pulsford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux web pads?
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 16:26:52 +1000
Aaron Kulkis wrote:
<crop>
I posted too quickly and didn't crop properly, I was referring to the
web-fridge; some people might want one with a recipe website as the
homepage.
IanP
------------------------------
From: John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited
Date: 20 Feb 2001 05:55:14 GMT
Emery Lapinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: "Information wants to be free" is just a metaphor, a different way
: of thinking that can lead to insights. If you could visulaize
: information you might see it ebb and flow and expand. It might flow
: around obstructions or leak out of containers. You might watch it
: and attribute behaviors to it, and a will, and imagine that it
: wants to be free.
I'm not sure it is good to exclude human will in the metaphor. I think it
puts off people who think they own information. I think I own
information, and I certainly want to control when and how it is released.
I've put some of my digital pictures in the honest to goodness Public
Domain
http://members.nbci.com/jjens/
but I wouldn't want every picture I snap to go to some huge PD warehouse
in the sky. (More of a privacy issue there than a profit issue. I choose
not to put friends or family on the net.)
I think a better metaphor would communicate the *possibilities* of the
digital world, and perhaps the benefits of the gift culture it *enables*.
It makes better politics anyway,
John
--
33° 38' 49N 117° 56' 33W
------------------------------
From: "B.B." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd,alt.fan.jeremy-reimer
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:33:43 -0600
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
WickedDyno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
@StudlyOS decompiles and rewrites your apps to eliminate bugs.
It gives helpful tips on meeting women every time you log in. Helps
prevent that nasty crashing and burning sensation....
--
B.B. --I am not a goat! [EMAIL PROTECTED] @airmail.net
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donald R. McGregor)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 06:35:34 -0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Matt Kennel <REMOVE THE BAD DOMAIN> wrote:
>On Mon, 19 Feb 2001 16:52:31 -0500, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>:
>:
>[secure audio path]
>The basic message is that your computer and your data and your
>operating system are not yours, they function at the pleasure of
>Microsoft and its corporate partners.
>[...]
>The central ideological of the personal computer was predicated on
>removing the power from the priesthood of corporate masters that ran
>IBM mainframes.
>
>Microsoft has now come full circle and become precisely what it
>originally wanted to destroy.
My memory is hazy, but I think MS's mantra back in the elder
days was "a computer on every desktop, and MS software on
every computer." Which is not quite the same thing.
Apple, on the other hand, was big on the personal empowerment
angle.
(I'm deeply skeptical of the whole .NET angle, btw. yeah, let's
replace our path from our bits to the CPU with a medium that's
about one or two orders of magnitude less reliable than disk.)
--
Don McGregor | "The cemetery is filled with indispensable men."
[EMAIL PROTECTED]| --DeGaulle
------------------------------
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Microsoft says Linux threatens innovation
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed Allen)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 06:40:04 GMT
In article <KbZj6.4879$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:96nchr$ms9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> I am removing you from my killfile. You are just in need of too much
>> help.
>
>If you killfiled me, why did you make such sweeping statements just a few
>days ago?
>
>http://groups.google.com/groups?q=msgid:968tl8%24i5k%241%40allenhome.kc.rr.c
>om&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&rnum=1&seld=926708034&ic=1
>
>You then failed to respond to my response to your message, obviously
>pretending you didn't read it:
>
>http://groups.google.com/groups?q=msgid:BR7i6.984%24k7.163808%40ruti.visi.co
>m&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&rnum=1&seld=926405068&ic=1
>
I would only have seen it if someone I had not killed posted to that
same branch after you did and I had followed back up the thread.
I give you the timing. I was wrong. Thanks for correcting me. I will
try to be more careful.
>> A monopoly never "gives" anything away. You pay for it by losing
>> the innovations which would have come from their target and by never
>> seeing a hint of newer ideas which would have when others used those
>> new technologies in ways that the monopolists technologies could not
>> be coerced into.
>
>This statement doesn't parse. It seems like you might be trying to say that
>MS prevents people from using technology. That is simply false, or else
>Linux would not exist at all, nor would OS's like BeOS or MacOS X.
>
It does parse for people who are not in denial about the desktop
monopoly and M$ abuse of it.
By strangling startup technologies Microsoft making us all pay more
than the newer offering would have cost. They recoup the cost of
their FUD and buying technologies so the project can be canceled by
charging higher prices for all their software.
New technologies can do things that the older technologies could not
or they would not be new. So by denying all of us the chance to see
if those new technologies are useful for each of us Microsoft is
denying us that value. A cost may come from denial of convenience
or efficiency instead of your wallet.
You have said that you disapprove of some of their actions, why are
they disagreeable to you ?
>> Erik wake up. You have been victimized by a criminal organization
>> which provided you with some glitzy toys to distract you.
>
>I've not been victimized by anyone but Red Hat and Mandrake for taking my
>money for products that don't work at all.
>
Are you denying that Microsoft has a monopoly ? Or that monopolies
do not charge higher prices than competitors do ?
How does paying more not harm you ? Do you enjoy sending money to
Redmond in return for no improvement ?
>> It is not your fault. Victims don't ask to be abused but nobody but
>> you can get you away from further abuse.
>
>Kill the drama, you can do better than that.
>
The drama was an attempt to shock you out of your denial. Obviously
it did not work. I'll try to think of something else.
--
How much do we need to pay you to screw Netscape?
- BILL GATES, to AOL in a 1996 meeting
------------------------------
From: "nuxx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 15:11:28 +0800
"Aaron Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> nuxx wrote:
> > No luck about it. If you apply datacentre type methodologies in design
and
> > change control as you would with any Unix server, NT is very reliable.
Some
>
> Translation: most NT Admins and MCSE's are shit-heads.
>
Yep.
nuxx.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
