Linux-Misc Digest #453, Volume #21 Wed, 18 Aug 99 20:13:10 EDT
Contents:
Securing Netscape ??? (Kevin E Cosgrove)
login.defs & xterm -ls (Don Feliciano)
Re: linux on microchannel (Gergo Barany)
Re: Comparing HPFS to ext2fs... ("Steve Snyder")
Re: wvdial - 'modem not detected' (W.G. Unruh)
Can Linux and NT talk? ("Vasanth")
Re: *nix vs. MS security ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Can I switch from OS/2 to Linux and be happy? (Brad BARCLAY)
Re: dpms without X? (H.Bruijn)
Re: Troll (was: why not C++?) (Rainer Joswig)
Re: *nix vs. MS security ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why did RMS adopt Unix? (and other questions) (Rainer Joswig)
AOpen 40speed CDROM drive slow in linux (Bram Avontuur)
Re: *nix vs. MS security (Roger)
problem on perl/tk (Eric)
Re: no response from external usr/3com sportster (Leonard Evens)
Re: *nix vs. MS security ("cbrink")
Re: *nix vs. MS security (Oystein Viggen)
Re: *nix vs. MS security (Roger)
Re: problem on perl/tk (Jon Bloom)
Re: *nix vs. MS security (Oystein Viggen)
Printer problem : printer job was not unlinked (Mathew)
Re: "locate" doesn't work (Villy Kruse)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.security
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kevin E Cosgrove)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Securing Netscape ???
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 19:47:34 GMT
Howdy,
What do I need to do to enable secure browsing with Netscape on
my Redhat 5.1 system? Netscape works fine w/o security. I know
about Fortify and the 40/128 bit stuff. But, it seems I have
zero security, rather than just low security. I think if I could
get any security, then I'd be able to get higher security.
Thanks in advance....
--
kevinc AT doink DOT COM
Change the AT and DOT in my reply-to address to send e-mail.
Unless otherwise noted, the statements herein reflect my personal
opinions and not those of any organization with which I may be affiliated.
------------------------------
From: Don Feliciano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux,comp.unix.shell
Subject: login.defs & xterm -ls
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 18:49:14 GMT
Running @(#)PD KSH v5.2.8 96/08/19 on Slackware 4.0
In /etc/login.defs, the default PATH is set up:
#
# *REQUIRED* The default PATH settings, for superuser and normal=20
users.
#
# (they are minimal, add the rest in the shell startup files)
ENV_SUPATH PATH=3D/foo
ENV_PATH PATH=3D/foo
So, in /etc/profile I have:
PATH=3D"$PATH:/bar"
export PATH
This is all well and good. echo $PATH correctly shows /foo:/bar
However, if I invoke an xterm with -ls as an argment, echo $PATH=20
yeilds /foo:/bar:/bar. My guess is that PATH is already set before=20
xterm runs through /etc/profile (which has PATH=3D$PATH:/bar).
Why does this happen? What's the workaround?
I have "XTerm*loginShell: true" in my ~/.Xdefaults file, so this=20
behavior is an annoyance in all of my xterms by default. I like the=20
login shell invoked b/c I have aliases, PS1 prompts, etc getting set=20
in .profile and .kshrc
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gergo Barany)
Subject: Re: linux on microchannel
Date: 18 Aug 1999 19:58:04 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I hope this question hasn't been answered a
>thousand times before; I can't seem to find
>anything definitive on installing any flavor of
>linux on an IBM PS/2 with an MCA bus. All the
>links I find are dead or old. I would prefer to
>use Red Hat but if there is another distribution
>that works well on the MCA, I'm open to ideas.
>THanks!
The kernel definitely can be compiled to support MCA, but this might be
removed sometime in the near future, IIRC (which is not a real problem
if you don't need to have drivers for very new hardware (which doesn't
seem to be the case)).
Another question is whether any distribution comes with a kernel in
which this enabled by default. If they don't, you'd have to
cross-compile a kernel on another machine. Then it should be possible to
create an install disk with that custom kernel.
Gergo
--
Democracy is good. I say this because other systems are worse.
-- Jawaharlal Nehru
GU d- s:+ a--- C++>$ UL+++ P>++ L+++ E>++ W+ N++ o? K- w--- !O !M !V
PS+ PE+ Y+ PGP+ t* 5+ X- R>+ tv++ b+>+++ DI+ D+ G>++ e* h! !r !y+
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.os2.misc
From: "Steve Snyder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Steve Snyder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Comparing HPFS to ext2fs...
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 20:42:06 GMT
On 18 Aug 1999 19:12:47 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>In <c1.2c.2RsHly$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John
>Thompson) writes:
[snip]
>
>John, where did you get R/W HPFS drivers for Linux? I have recently
>installed the latest SuSE (6.2 as I recall), and my HPFS access is
>read only.
It is part of the Linux development v2.3.x kernel. Your distro
contains the stable (v2.2.x) kernel.
***** Steve Snyder *****
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (W.G. Unruh)
Subject: Re: wvdial - 'modem not detected'
Date: 17 Aug 99 21:06:08 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>Hoping wvdial would help me with my ppp logon problems, I installed it
>today only to have it cough up a 'modem not detected' message. It runs
>through setting up the script and the values in wvdial.conf look ok but no
>go.
I have never been able to make wvdial work. Do not knwo why. For
step by step instructions on setting up ppp, see
axion.physics.ubc.ca/ppp-linux.html
------------------------------
From: "Vasanth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Can Linux and NT talk?
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 02:37:09 +0530
Hi!
Can someone tell me if you can map files/drives of NT on linux and
visce-versa and if so how.
Thanx
Vasanth
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.security
Subject: Re: *nix vs. MS security
Date: 18 Aug 1999 22:03:52 GMT
Christopher Lu wrote:
>
> I'm taking a class on operating systems. During the last class, the
> instructor mentioned that *nices are less reliable and less secure than
> Microsoft OS's. His reasoning is that because *nices (espeically linux) is
> free and everyone has access to it, it's less secure. Random people can
> hack into a *nix system easier because they can figure out the interrupts
> and stuff, since it's a free OS.
>
> I questioned the fact that the majority of servers on the internet use some
> flavor or *nix. He answered saying that only small size companies use *nix.
> Everyone else uses something more secure (he meant MS I'm assuming).
>
> I wanted to know what everyone here thinks about this. I'm a firm believer
> thatn *nix is a very stable, secure system. Granted I haven't had a whole
> lot of experience dealing with *nix but everything I've seen/read/heard has
> led me to that conclusion. But being naive when it came to *nix I was
> unable to counter my instructor with anything substantial.
>
> Thanks!
Your instructor must be trying to put one over on you. I work for a
rather large company (Fortune 10). We do use some NT, but not for anything
really critical. Mission critical and big is reserved for mainframes and
UNIX. It's not so much a security issue as a reliability one.
I would trust Linux over NT any day. More eyes have looked it over for
potential security holes. Many have been found and fixed. And the fixes
are *fast* when new holes are discovered. This is demonstrably *not* the
case with Microsoft.
Also, the Microsoft crowd is paid, the Linux crowd does it for love, fame,
recognition. Kind of like a mercenary army vs. the home folks. The home
folks will win every time all else being equal. Only in this case it isn't
equal, the home folks seem to have more and better minds working on the
problems (IMHO)...
------------------------------
From: Brad BARCLAY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.apps,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Can I switch from OS/2 to Linux and be happy?
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 17:48:54 -0400
e-frog wrote:
> Finally! Somebody says what needs to be said!
Well, I try :)
> Of course, the original poster is free to choose their OS as he/she
> pleases, but Brad is spot on. The original poster is basically looking for
> OS/2, but with more hype.
>
> Warp 3 came waaaay back before Win95 came out and it is _still_ being
> supported. Linux, I'm sure will continue to be "supported" in its own
> fashion. Linux is great if you're a hot-shot programmer, but RIGHT NOW it
> is not good enough for even technically literate masses (i.e. me :)
I just want to state for the record: this isn't about wether Linux is
or is not a good OS. It is an excellent OS for many purposes. But it's
foolish to move into a different computng paradigm, and then try to make
it into something it's not. I wouldn't encourage a Linux user to switch
to OS/2 and then try to make it work exactly like Linux did anymore that
I think our original poster should move to Linux and then try to make it
work like OS/2. It's foolish to try to force one paradigm to act just
like another, when you could just run the other in the first place, or
simply switch to the other paradigm.
> I don't buy the "light on resources" argument either. With X and GNOME or
> KDE going, and a full suite of apps running, it runs no faster than OS/2
> on the same machine. And if you run out of swap space...you're hosed. It
> doesn't help that it goes on a separate partition which can't be
> dynamically grown.
Well, AFAIK this isn't exactly correct. Linux can also swap via swap
files, and there is an LVM for Linux which would allow you to
dynamically grow a partition (although wether this works for swap
partitions or not I have no idea).
> I have no doubts about using OS/2 for at least the next 5 years. No
> questions about support. I choose to use OS/2 not to be different, but
> because it works better.
People should certainly use what's best for them. If that's OS/2,
great. If it's Linux, still great - just make certain you use the right
tool for the right job, and for the right reasons.
Linux != OS/2 + more hype. Linux has more hype, has things that OS/2
doesn't have, and is missing alot of functionality that OS/2 does have.
The trick is to determine what functionality you need, and then use the
OS that fits it best. It's that simple.
And if one is unsure - well thats what BootManager was invented for! :)
Brad BARCLAY
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Posted from the OS/2 WARP v5 desktop of Brad BARCLAY.
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Location: 2G43D@Torolabs
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (H.Bruijn)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: dpms without X?
Date: 18 Aug 1999 22:01:52 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 18 Aug 1999 20:30:51 GMT, clee allegedly wrote:
>Is there an interface which would allow me to turn off my monitor without
>accessing the X server? I am interested in turning off my monitor via a
>script whenever the power goes out and my UPS starts running off the
>battery. I don't always have X running, otherwise I might try using some
>variant of "xset -powersave off".
>
>"man -k dpms" and searches for "+linux +dpms" only bring up references to
>xset. I know this has to be possible. Can someone point me in the right
>direction?
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>-chris
>
>Red Hat 6.0, kernel 2.2.11
>
simply do not plug your monitor into the power supply ;-)
Just get a simple surge protector and plug it into that of your worries
about frying it.
--
Herman
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------
If a trainstation is place where trains stop, what is workstation?
=====================================================================
Herman Bruijn hbruijn dix.Mines.EDU
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rainer Joswig)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Troll (was: why not C++?)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 00:27:58 +0200
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Stephan Houben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> IIRC there was a C compiler for some Lisp machines. It implemented
> pointers with "cons"-cells.
Sure? The Lisp system had pointers (called Locatives) as a
primitive.
> A greater abstraction inversion the world
> has never seen.
Not really. Cons cells are in principle pointers. Two pointers
in one row. Actually on the Lisp machine they had tagged
data with CDR-coding for lists (-> cons cells).
This means a new list of, say, ten items is internally stored
as a consecutive array of ten pointers to items.
> Note that Linux is not a C OS. It is a general-purpose OS whose kernel
> happens to be written in C.
That's to bad.
> If they hadn't told me this, I would never know.
> I still don''t care. As long as the StephanTalk compiler does its job,
> I don't care in which language the OS is written.
A Lisp users says: I don't care what language the kernel
is written in, as long as it is Lisp.
The difference between a Lisp machine and a Linux
system is huge. The Lisp Machine has an open, incrementally
changeable and dynamic OS. The OS is written in a
pure OOP style. That means that things like
IP-Packets or Processes are objects. And operations
on them are implemented as methods.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: *nix vs. MS security
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.security
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 22:42:05 GMT
In comp.os.linux.security Christopher Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: I'm taking a class on operating systems. During the last class, the
: instructor mentioned that *nices are less reliable and less secure than
: Microsoft OS's. His reasoning is that because *nices (espeically linux) is
: free and everyone has access to it, it's less secure. Random people can
: hack into a *nix system easier because they can figure out the interrupts
: and stuff, since it's a free OS.
I take it your instructor is a firm believer in security through
ignorance.
Just because he doesn't know how to hack into a system doesn't mean
its secure.
Best regards,
Stephen Jenuth
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rainer Joswig)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Why did RMS adopt Unix? (and other questions)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 00:46:35 +0200
In article <0RBu3.93$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > 2) Why did RMS decide to develop a Unix-type system if he came
> > from LISP?
>
> LISP is a computer language. UNIX is an operating system. The two aren't
> mutually exclusive, and in fact, as a language, LISP *MUST* run on an
> operating system. UNIX is as good an OS as any for that task. (Actually,
> I don't know enough about LISP to know what its optimal host OS would be,
> but AFAIK there's nothing extraordinarily BAD about UNIX from a LISP point
> of view.)
Unix *is* bad. It's ugly and full of crap.
You really don't want compare Unix to an OS
which is object-oriented down to the core.
At the AI Lab they had developed a Lisp OS,
which has been commercialized by several companies (Symbolics,
LMI, TI, ...). This Lisp OS ran on a special purpose
workstation hardware. Before 1980 this thing had
an object-oriented OS, bitmapped display, mouse, large
disks, virtual memory, garbage collection,
threaded object-oriented OS, networking, ...
Unfortunately the system was a bit too expensive for
the average guy and it was tailored to make software
development (in Lisp for AI) as easy as possible.
The Lisp machine card I'm using in my Mac once
was sold for $35000. At around 1991 it was available
for universities for $10000. Well, it shipped
with an object-oriented OS and most of the
source for the system.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bram Avontuur)
Subject: AOpen 40speed CDROM drive slow in linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bram Avontuur)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 00:01:41 GMT
Hi,
When using Linux with my AOpen 40-speed IDE cdrom drive, I get really low
transfer speeds. The drive is on a UDMA-ide controller, 32bits I/O and
dma-flags are set (using hdparm), which, in my opinion, should be a good
configuration. However, while using it it never spins up to its max speed
(which is audible, and noticeble in transfer speed). Using win98, it
does spin up to full speed, and transfers an entire CD-Rom in about 3
minutes to my harddisk (the very same disk as the one my linux partitions
are sitting on).
My question is, where do I look for hints on how to fine-tune my
configuration to get the performance it can deliver?
Please reply by email to this message as well with suggestions; I don't
actively read this newsgroup.
Thanks,
Bram
--
Bram Avontuur
mp3 up 15+22:55, 2 users, load 1.06, 1.05, 1.01
nixnut up 4+02:04, 7 users, load 2.14, 1.69, 1.28
------------------------------
From: Roger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.security
Subject: Re: *nix vs. MS security
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 22:06:19 +0100
Christopher Lu wrote:
>
> I'm taking a class on operating systems. During the last class, the
> instructor mentioned that *nices are less reliable and less secure than
> Microsoft OS's. His reasoning is that because *nices (espeically linux) is
> free and everyone has access to it, it's less secure. Random people can
> hack into a *nix system easier because they can figure out the interrupts
> and stuff, since it's a free OS.
>
> I questioned the fact that the majority of servers on the internet use some
> flavor or *nix. He answered saying that only small size companies use *nix.
> Everyone else uses something more secure (he meant MS I'm assuming).
>
> I wanted to know what everyone here thinks about this. I'm a firm believer
> thatn *nix is a very stable, secure system. Granted I haven't had a whole
> lot of experience dealing with *nix but everything I've seen/read/heard has
> led me to that conclusion. But being naive when it came to *nix I was
> unable to counter my instructor with anything substantial.
NT is reasonably easy to crack - NTFSDOS.EXE will get you into any file
on the HDD if you boot from a floppy - most sys admins don't bother
setting the BIOS to boot from C only. There are other stupid holes like
caching of dial-up passwords, plus earlier versions of NT can be
disabled with the Ping Of Death (a very large IP packet). From my
experience with NT4 Workstation, it needs a state-of-the-art PC (PII, at
least 64MB) for decent performance and falls over more often than Win98
(which is fine if you avoid using IE4 - if Netscape crashes it doesn't
drag the whole OS down with it).
I haven't had much experience of Unix/Linux yet but NT is certainly not
a perfect system. Besides stability, people run half the Internet on
Apache because it's free or very cheap - NT costs hundreds and you
normally have to licence each box.
--
Roger
Web: http://freespace.virgin.net/roger.cantwell
ICQ: 40038278
*** Vital! Please remove 'removethis.' from the Reply address ***
------------------------------
From: Eric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: problem on perl/tk
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 02:29:15 -0800
Dear Linux with perl/tk expert:
Do you know the Perl/Tk program
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
Use Tk;
my $mw=MainWindow->new;
$mw->title( Hello World);
$mw->Button(-text => "Done", -command => sub { exit })->pack;
MainLoop;
which is on book perl/tk by Nancy Walsh, "Learning Perl?Tk" by O'Reilly
page 11
in bash, I got
Useless use of a constant in void context at /lemay/hello.pl line 6.
Can't locate object method "Use" via package "Tk" at /lemay/hello.pl
line 2.
Do you know what cause that wrong? and how to fix it?
Thanks your tech reply in advance.
Eric Lin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Leonard Evens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: no response from external usr/3com sportster
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 16:38:45 -0500
Pas Moi wrote:
>
> i'm having trouble getting a response from a usr/3com sportster
> external modem. i've fed setserial a bunch of different irq's, tried
> the various /dev/ttyS* and cua*, but i've yet to get as much as an
> "OK" from this thing. no matter what i do, it just sits there. any
> suggestions?
>
> --
> Guy Yasko -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [remove noise]
>
> Is this the line for the latest whimsical YUGOSLAVIAN drama which also
> makes you want to CRY and reconsider the VIETNAM WAR?
I would guess that the serial port is not being cofigured or
that there is some interrupt conflict. Check the boot messages
by using dmesg. It should normally show ttyS0X listings with
interrupts for X=0,1 or more if you had more serial ports than
2. Check to see if you have the file /etc/isapnp.conf and
see if there are any apparent interrupt conflicts. Also look
at /etc/conf.modules.
I've encountered many cases of difficulty configuring and internal
modem, but I've never seen a case of a problem with an external
modem. I presume it is not a Winmodem, never having seen an
external Winmodem.
--
Leonard Evens [EMAIL PROTECTED] 847-491-5537
Dept. of Mathematics, Northwestern Univ., Evanston, IL 60208
------------------------------
From: "cbrink" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.security
Subject: Re: *nix vs. MS security
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 13:51:53 -0700
Ask your prof about BackOrifice 2000
check out
http://www.idg.net/crd_security_9-68221.html
Christopher Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:T1Eu3.4862$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I'm taking a class on operating systems. During the last class, the
> instructor mentioned that *nices are less reliable and less secure than
> Microsoft OS's. His reasoning is that because *nices (espeically linux)
is
> free and everyone has access to it, it's less secure. Random people can
> hack into a *nix system easier because they can figure out the interrupts
> and stuff, since it's a free OS.
>
> I questioned the fact that the majority of servers on the internet use
some
> flavor or *nix. He answered saying that only small size companies use
*nix.
> Everyone else uses something more secure (he meant MS I'm assuming).
>
> I wanted to know what everyone here thinks about this. I'm a firm
believer
> thatn *nix is a very stable, secure system. Granted I haven't had a whole
> lot of experience dealing with *nix but everything I've seen/read/heard
has
> led me to that conclusion. But being naive when it came to *nix I was
> unable to counter my instructor with anything substantial.
>
> Thanks!
>
>
------------------------------
From: Oystein Viggen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.security
Subject: Re: *nix vs. MS security
Date: 18 Aug 1999 22:55:09 +0200
Andre Kostur wrote:
> Off-Topic: Ask Microsoft what they're running Hotmail off of.
Heck, ask them what they were running some of their bigger web-servers
off of before people discovered... :)
Oystein
--
"But you know what they say - The world wasn't built in a day"
------------------------------
From: Roger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.security
Subject: Re: *nix vs. MS security
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 22:13:05 +0100
cbrink wrote:
>
> Ask your prof about BackOrifice 2000
Forgot to mention - there are thousands of NT viruses but, AFAIK, no
Unix viruses at all. Unix file permissions make it very difficult for
any unauthorised code to be run, unless some careless sysadmin is
surfing the Net as root.
--
Roger
Web: http://freespace.virgin.net/roger.cantwell
ICQ: 40038278
*** Vital! Please remove 'removethis.' from the Reply address ***
------------------------------
From: Jon Bloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: problem on perl/tk
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 19:10:16 -0400
Eric wrote:
>
> Dear Linux with perl/tk expert:
>
> Do you know the Perl/Tk program
> #!/usr/bin/perl -w
> Use Tk;
> my $mw=MainWindow->new;
> $mw->title( Hello World);
> $mw->Button(-text => "Done", -command => sub { exit })->pack;
> MainLoop;
>
> which is on book perl/tk by Nancy Walsh, "Learning Perl?Tk" by O'Reilly
> page 11
> in bash, I got
>
> Useless use of a constant in void context at /lemay/hello.pl line 6.
> Can't locate object method "Use" via package "Tk" at /lemay/hello.pl
> line 2.
This would be better asked in a perl newsgroup, but...
Change the second line to read:
use Tk;
(A lower-case 'u' in "use.")
While you're at it, put "Hello World" in quotes, too.
Jon
--
Jon Bloom, KE3Z
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Electronic Publications Manager (Software, CD-ROMs and Web site)
------------------------------
From: Oystein Viggen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.security
Subject: Re: *nix vs. MS security
Date: 18 Aug 1999 22:48:16 +0200
"Christopher Lu" wrote:
> I'm taking a class on operating systems. During the last class, the
> instructor mentioned that *nices are less reliable and less secure than
> Microsoft OS's. His reasoning is that because *nices (espeically linux) is
> free and everyone has access to it, it's less secure. Random people can
> hack into a *nix system easier because they can figure out the interrupts
> and stuff, since it's a free OS.
Your instructor is totally bullshitting you. The type of "security"
that he seems to prefer is known as "Security through obscurity". It
means that the programmers figure that nobody will ever be able to
reverse engineer their code, so it doesn't really have to be that
secure.
Open source programs have to implement real security meaning that even
though one has access to the code, one cannot use that to circumvent
the system, because the security is made that way. (I'm no expert
either... :)
A good example is file-sharing in NT. Since NT was released,
everybody assumed that you would need a username and a password to
access a share, and since the source was closed, nobody bothered to
check. But when other people were starting to reverse engineer it,
they discovered that they didn't really need the username and pass,
because much of the security was implemented in the client instead of
in the server. This was a year or two after the first release of
NT4. If the code and protocol for file sharing in NT had been open
source, somebody would have been bound to discover the obvious a lot
sooner.
Tell your instructor that real security is implemented in a way so
that having access to the code, doesn't help unless you find a
bug.
The fact that bugs in code is discovered every day, does in no way
mean that UNIX-like systems are inherently more buggy than NT. It's
just a result of that the bugs are easier to track down when one has
access to the source, and they are also easier to fix.
Microsoft, on the other hand, doesn't even bother with fixing their
bugs fast. The oh-so-great Bill Gates actually once said something
along the lines of that "fixing bugs doesn't sell software. Adding
features does." How is a company with a pilosophy like that supposed
to be able to create a secure system?
Ignore your instructor! You _know_ you're right!
This was my rant. Thanks for listening... :)
Oystein
--
"But you know what they say - The world wasn't built in a day"
------------------------------
From: Mathew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: redhat.config,redhat.servers.general
Subject: Printer problem : printer job was not unlinked
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 21:30:50 GMT
I just set up a printer on a RedHat 6.0 box. Some of the users are getting
e-mail back (after the print job prints) stating:
>Delivered-To: mathew@localhost
>From: anonymous@localhost
>Date: 18 Aug 1999 13:06:41 -0600
>To: mathew
>Subject: hp3 printer job "<unknown>"
>Reply-To: root@localhost
>
>Your printer job
>was not unlinked: permission denied
Any ideas on how to correct this? The printouts are printing fine.
Thanks
-Mathew
================== Posted via CNET Linux Help ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Villy Kruse)
Subject: Re: "locate" doesn't work
Date: 13 Aug 1999 09:48:42 +0200
In article <7ovglc$if0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Russell S. DiPesa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Recently, I attempted to locate a file on my RH 5.2 box and received the
>following message:
>
>[root@mail cron.daily]# locate man
>locate: /usr/local/var/locatedb: No such file or directory
>
>I ran updatedb.cron and it completed successfully, but still I receive the
>above message. Look familiar?
No, it loks like a mixed version where either locate or updatedb is wrong
version.
run:
rpm -V findutils
Villy
------------------------------
** 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.misc) 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-Misc Digest
******************************
