Linux-Advocacy Digest #457
Linux-Advocacy Digest #457, Volume #34 Sat, 12 May 01 18:13:04 EDT Contents: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (Erik Funkenbusch) Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (Erik Funkenbusch) Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (Erik Funkenbusch) Re: Microsoft standards... (was Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product) (Chad Myers) Re: bank switches from using NT 4 (The Ghost In The Machine) Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (Erik Funkenbusch) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Roy Culley) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Roy Culley) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick) Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (Erik Funkenbusch) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Ayende Rahien) Re: bank switches from using NT 4 (Ayende Rahien) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick) Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft feature (Erik Funkenbusch) Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Les Mikesell) Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Les Mikesell) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (JS PL) From: Erik Funkenbusch [EMAIL PROTECTED] Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 16:47:03 -0500 Matthew Gardiner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Ayende Rahien wrote: Matthew Gardiner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Here are a couple of Win2K servers that stayed up for a long time. http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=partnering3.microsoft.com 244 http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=download.windowsbeta.microsoft.com 216 http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=msdnisv.microsoft.com 189 http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=corporate.windowsupdate.microsoft.c om 189 http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=esl.one.microsoft.com 184 They are all clusters. Now, get, one, lone server loaded with Win2k Server, and then see the uptime. Netcraft can't handle clusters. These sites use clusters. No, they're not. They're single machines. All of them. -- From: Erik Funkenbusch [EMAIL PROTECTED] Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 16:49:59 -0500 GreyCloud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Erik Funkenbusch wrote: GreyCloud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message Thats right... compare RH 6.2 to the latest MS O/S. What about the latest RH 7.1 then? I thought that was one of the advantages of Linux, that you didn't have to upgrade to the latest to get the latest stuff? Or are you now saying that you HAVE to upgrade to the latest version of the distro in order to see improvements? You don't have to upgrade. Then would you please stop contradicting yourself. Are you going to bitch that they didn't use the latest RH 7.1, or are you going to say that you don't need to upgrade? [blah blah, trying to distract from the point] Last time I was at Staples I saw Win2K going for around $287 without upgrade. And for OEM install of WinME it was around $150. Then you have to add more money for the windows compilers if you want one. GCC is perfectly free for Windows, just as it is for Linux. In fact, there are dozens of free compilers for Windows. -- From: Erik Funkenbusch [EMAIL PROTECTED] Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 16:53:33 -0500 Edward Rosten [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:9dirc0$b0l$[EMAIL PROTECTED]... You are trying to propogate the FUD/lie that W2K is not capable of steller uptimes. 120 Days, according to Microsoft. Yeah, really stellar. 120 days was the MEAN, not the maximum. -- From: Chad Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED] Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy Subject: Re: Microsoft standards... (was Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product) Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 21:28:46 GMT Gary Hallock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... In article 9djsjs$c22$[EMAIL PROTECTED], Ayende Rahien Don'[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A It doesn't takes weeks to do GUI. B A good GUI allows you to do the same. Really? You have a GUI that can provide all the functionality of Unix commands and pipes? Where is this magical GUI? Clipboard? Piping text around isn't something you do very often in the GUI. You do this because that's the way CLIs are designed. I don't see many command-line flow-charts, 3D design, or contact/calendar management apps either. Each has their place. -c -- From
Linux-Advocacy Digest #457
Linux-Advocacy Digest #457, Volume #33Mon, 9 Apr 01 01:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: My take on GPLed code as free software (was: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and
lies about free software) ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Read this clueless Linux advocates... (Ray Chason)
Re: Read this clueless Linux advocates... ("WGAF")
Re: Read this clueless Linux advocates... (Ian Pulsford)
Re: Read this clueless Linux advocates... ("WGAF")
Re: Read this clueless Linux advocates... ("WGAF")
Re: Fun With Old Laptops. (: (Ray Chason)
Re: What is 99 percent of copyright law? was Re: Richard Stallman ("Les Mikesell")
Re: t. max devlin: kook (Ray Chason)
Re: t. max devlin: kook (Chad Everett)
Re: Read this clueless Linux advocates... (GreyCloud)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (JulianD.)
Re: Read this clueless Linux advocates... (GreyCloud)
Re: lack of linux billionaires explained in one easy message (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: lack of linux billionaires explained in one easy message (GreyCloud)
From: "Les Mikesell" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: My take on GPLed code as free software (was: Richard Stallman what a
tosser, and lies about free software)
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 03:13:22 GMT
"Rob S. Wolfram" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
So you do understand the specifics - but you didn't answer the general
question: if you still maintain that all necessary combinations can be
GPLed as a whole is it because you think other restrictions are not
significant or that all users can do without all code where other
restrictions
apply?
For examples like this, read section 7 of the GPL. It is there for a
reason.
For other examples I'd say that it is entirely possible that you can
freely redistribute it under Non-GPL conditions but not under GPL ones,
but then I state that those licenses are also encumbered in its
redistribution rules. Why only blame the GPL?
Because it is the GPL that prevents distribution and places unconditional
claims on other people's work. Other licenses may have requirements
but they may be quite reasonable to meet. A license that demands that
you change the license on someone else's existing work has a
requirement that is both unreasonable and impossible to meet.
There is no way to consider those as similar encumbrances.
Case in point: if you cannot change the distribution restrictions to
GPL, then the license is just as restrictive as the GPL. So it is not
only the GPL who is to blame for your being unable to distribute the
combination.
No, for the hundredth time, the other restrictions did not, and would
not under any circumstance prevent distribution. Only the GPL did.
Your logic is flawed here. If one part of the system is "most
restrictive" (i.e. GPL), then why couldn't you distribute the whole
system as GPL?
Because it included components that did not belong to me but had
their own terms that allowed free distribution. Even if I were
able to change the terms on those other works I would consider
it unethical to do so, just as I consider the GPL's demands about
other people's works to be unethical.
There really are only two possibilities here:
1. It was legally possible but *you* *chose* not to distribute the whole
under the greatest common denominator (i.e. the GPL) so *you*, not the
GPL, is the restrictive force here.
That wasn't the case, but yes I would have chosen not to change the
terms on someone else's work if the choice had been mine.
2. It was legally impossible because you could not apply the GPL to the
other part(s). This means that like the GPL, the other parts were
licensed under equally restrictive conditions (i.e.: you can only
redistribute this software under license A, B or C).
The other components had restrictions, but they had nothing to do
with redistribution.
If you see a third possibility, I am eager to hear about it.
As I recall the wattcp library did not allow modified versions
to be distributed - the author wanted to collect and collate the
patches, if any.I think the aspii library just required attribution.
Only the GPL made impossible demands that prevented
distribution of the combination.
Still, sharing is sharing and using is using. Different viewpoints.
But the 'using' viewpoint is only possible after distribution is allowed,
and the GPL prevents many instances of distribution.
Correct. The GPL ensures the freedom of use of the software you *have*.
It also ensures the freedom of use for the person that gets the software
from you.
But, it ensures that you can't share much of what you can use and others
would likely want to use as well.
This comes down to the circular argument
Linux-Advocacy Digest #457
Linux-Advocacy Digest #457, Volume #31 Sun, 14 Jan 01 16:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Didn't the Gartner group say don't move to W2K straight away ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Why Linux won't get far in Luxembourg's comapanies. ("Bartek Kostrzewa")
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance ("Chad Myers")
Re: OS-X GUI on Linux? (.)
Re: You and Microsoft... ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Windows 2000 ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("Chad Myers")
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance (J Sloan)
Re: Linux Mandrake 7.2 and the banana peel (.)
Re: Windows 2000 ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (.)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (.)
Re: Windows Stability
Re: OS-X GUI on Linux? (J Sloan)
Re: A salutary lesson about open source (Craig Kelley)
Re: You and Microsoft...
Re: You and Microsoft...
Re: One case where Linux has the edge (J Sloan)
Re: you dumb. and lazy.
Re: You and Microsoft... (Craig Kelley)
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Didn't the Gartner group say don't move to W2K straight away
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 14:38:24 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:9fns39.13o.ln@gd2zzx...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/16075.html
This is a driver issue only, not a problem with Win2k (unless you count poor
3rd party drivers to be a problem with the OS, in which case Linux has even
more problems there).
The other point brought up in the article about lack of certified software
is also a red herring. Software doesn't have to be certified to run
flawlessly. I think most companies are simply waiting for Whistler to
certify to save money.
--
From: "Bartek Kostrzewa" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Why Linux won't get far in Luxembourg's comapanies.
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 21:33:50 +0100
I'm a fellow Linux user, so this is not something against Linux, rather
against our tax system here in Luxembourg.
Why does an economically nice solution like a stock-hardware, Linux based
Server (in this case for Fileserver use) lose against a Win2k Server +
Compaq hardware?
My friend's father has a small company, he asked me to give him a proposal
for a file server (serving 8 computers with 500MB/day/PC), so I built a
server for 1500$ with SCSI, AMD Duron 750, 256 MB of RAM and a 100 Mbit NIC,
of course, I told him I'd install Linux and set up SAMBA for file serving
(the company is 100% M$ based). When he heard the price he said: "What?
That's far too cheap! I need to spend at least 7500$ on it, so I can reduce
my tax charges at the end of the year!" Now he bought a Win2k Server based
Compaq Proline server powered by an 933Mhz PIII, 256MB of RDRAM and 60GB
RAID-10 (4 30GB 10K rpm SCSI harddrives in RAID mode, stripped and imaged
together) and that for 8 computer low-profile file-sharing.
Even with the maximum service option possible (RedHat) the Linux-based
soultion wouldn't have cost enough...
As you see, Luxembourg's taxing logic is pretty hard to understand, you have
to invest tons of money into your businness, so the state can't take "extra"
taxes at the end of the year...
--
From: "Chad Myers" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 20:18:15 GMT
"Karri Kalpio" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
"Chad Myers" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just because there's some brave souls out there doesn't mean
that the Linux community is about to say: "Linux is enterprise
ready, and we have an enterprise OS called "ReiserFS", it's
good enough to run NASDAQ without worry of fault".
Well, true. That very much unlike the situation with Windows. The
Windows approach is that "when the next version is released Windows
will be more enterprise ready than ever". And that's how it´s been
since Windows 3.0.
Windows 3.0 is a client OS, so is 95, 98, Me, 2000 Professional, etc.
We're not talking about client OS, we're talking about server OS.
NT 4.0 and Windows 2000 server, Advanced Server, and Datacenter Server
have all proven themselves in the enterprise and have what it takes
in terms of performance, security, reliability, and scalability.
Linux has none of these.
-Chad
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: OS-X GUI on Linux?
Date: 14 Jan 2001 20:33:07 GMT
Bones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In article JTf86.33$[EMAIL PROTECTED], Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
"J Sloan" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
Something like Quartz could be substituted for the X11
based system without much trouble.
You're crazy. All existing GUI apps would not work with Quartz because the
existing apps use sockets to connect to the GUI.
Not necessarily.
Linux-Advocacy Digest #457
Linux-Advocacy Digest #457, Volume #28 Thu, 17 Aug 00 17:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: I'm out of here. Best wishes to all of you! (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says Linux
growth stagnating ("Drestin Black")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Chris Wenham)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Josiah Fizer)
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? ("Anthony D. Tribelli")
Re: being a nice guy is not self-interest ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: OS advertising in the movies... (was Re: Microsoft MCSE) (Matthias Warkus)
Re: I'm out of here. Best wishes to all of you! (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Linux Presidential Candidates? (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says Linux
growth stagnating (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Decent Linux CDR software wanted. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: being a nice guy is not self-interest ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Popular Culture (was: It's official...) (mark)
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: I'm out of here. Best wishes to all of you!
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 14:16:44 -0500
Tim Kelley wrote:
Nathaniel Jay Lee wrote:
You're happily married? God I feel sorry for your husband. He probably
comes home every night to a different personality and a different 'mood'
within that personality. Tell me something, how does he feel about your
multiple personalities and overall childish behavior?
Well, I suppose he never sees it. After all, you wouldn't want anyone
you actually 'know' to see this side of you (or these sides of you).
Her husband is only one more of his personalities. Actually,
steve/claire/heather/keys88 is a guy, so we really have a
personality recursion loop where Steve is talking though claire
(his wife) about his husband (steve?).
You know, you're probably right. I would suppose that the kids are all
personality splits too. One thing about it, you would never be lonely.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
--
From: "Drestin Black" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says
Linux growth stagnating
Date: 17 Aug 2000 14:36:02 -0500
"R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:8nfes0$9ck$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
snip
You have given a non-denial denial. You challenge my reasons
for suspecting you of having a financial tie to Microsoft, but
you don't deny that you have financial ties to Microsoft.
These ties could be anything from preferred treatment within MSDN
to a contract as a Microsoft Press Agent. Do you deny, without
qualifications, that you have any financial motives for supporting
Microsoft?
I state for the record and without any qualification that I do not have ANY
financial motives for supporting Microsoft. I have NEVER received ANY
preferred treatment within MSDN nor am I a MS Press Agent. I do not and
never have worked for MS. I have never received a single penny from MS for
any reason(except a software rebate once or twice, I think). I do not have
any financial ties to Microsoft.
My company and I uses and resells some MS products and we profit from doing
this. THAT is how I profit from "MS doing well."
Drestin Black
(however, after writing a negative post about a linux distribution, the
distributor never did offer to send me another free copy, so I *could* be
considered to have been influenced by their actions... grin)
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 19:38:04 GMT
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
"JS/PL" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
to consumers Microsoft is just_another_choice.
Ask twenty consumers at Wal-Mart or Circuit City what other "choice" is
available besides Microsoft.
Curtis
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
--
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
From: Chris Wenham [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 20:03:30 GMT
"Josiah" == Josiah Fizer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Chris Wenham wrote:
I must be missing something, or you are. I thought Everblue was the
effort to port the X window toolkit to OS/2's Presentation Manager to
make it easier to port X applications and run them seamlessly.
Som
Linux-Advocacy Digest #457
Linux-Advocacy Digest #457, Volume #27Tue, 4 Jul 00 16:13:06 EDT Contents: Re: Where did all my windows go? (Pete Goodwin) Re: Uptime 6 months and counting. (Aaron Kulkis) Re: Where did all my windows go? (Pete Goodwin) Re: LIE-nux is SUPPOST to destroy data (was: Re: This is a Troll, do not resond (was Re: Linux is junk)) (Leslie Mikesell) Re: C# is a copy of java (Aaron Kulkis) Re: I thought only Windows 98 SE did this! (Pete Goodwin) Re: Where did all my windows go? (abraxas) Re: I thought only Windows 98 SE did this! (Pete Goodwin) Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner? (Jan Knutar) Re: LIE-nux is SUPPOST to destroy data (was: Re: This is a Troll, do not resond (was Re: Linux is junk)) (Leslie Mikesell) Re: Which Linux should I try? (Nico Coetzee) It's not Commie to dethrone kings (Laura Goodwin) Re: LIE-nux is SUPPOST to destroy data (was: Re: This is a Troll, donot resond (was Re: Linux is junk)) (Pete Goodwin) Re: I hope you trolls are happy... (Aaron Kulkis) Re: LIE-nux is SUPPOST to destroy data (was: Re: This is a Troll, donot resond (was Re: Linux is junk)) (Pete Goodwin) Re: I hope you trolls are happy... (Aaron Kulkis) Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner? (Aaron Kulkis) Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Leslie Mikesell) Re: LIE-nux is SUPPOST to destroy data (was: Re: This is a Troll, do not resond (was Re: Linux is junk)) (Pete Goodwin) Re: LIE-nux is SUPPOST to destroy data (was: Re: This is a Troll, do not resond (was Re: Linux is junk)) (Pete Goodwin) Subject: Re: Where did all my windows go? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin) Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2000 19:37:30 GMT [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cihl) wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hey, Pete. Keep your shirt on, dude! We're working on it! (Uh, i mean the KDE-team is working on it) Faster! Faster! They didn't build Rome in one day either, you know. Have you seen KDE2 yet? Really much cooler than the old KDE, and much more userintuifriendlytive, too. It's exactly 9 weeks away until release. Get some screenshots at the kde.org and kde.com sites, if you're not just a Wintroll, that is. ;-) Yeah I had a look. Looks groovy! I think 'lagging behind' is not the right thing to say here. It suggests that Linux will never catch up to Windows, but i'd say that's not true at all, looking at the progress we've made in the past year. Linux is *quickly* gaining on Windows, so i'd like to call it 'catching up to' instead. Ok catching up then. Pete -- From: Aaron Kulkis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux Subject: Re: Uptime 6 months and counting. Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2000 15:38:32 -0400 Nic wrote: Aaron Kulkis wrote: Unfortunately, they are rather pricy friends when you are dealing with 10 or so machines --- and while the mass-reboot every month or two is inconvenient, it still doesn't waste *that* many CPU cycles that buying a new machine instead of the UPS wouldn't result in a net benefit. Here's what you do. Open it up...you will find a 12.7V lead-acid batter inside (probably a "motorcycle" battery. Nowbuy a couple of car batteries...and put them in parallel with the motorcycle battery. Nice idea... if the float charger can hack the current draw of the extra batteries without all the magic smoke leaking out :-) Although, if it's decently designed, it'll be current limited too. Of course, "decently designed" is not as common as I'd like it to be. Most *power* devices are waa over-built. Nic. -- J. Random Coder sky at wibble dot net -- Aaron R. Kulkis Unix Systems Engineer ICQ # 3056642 H: Knackos...you're a retard. A: The wise man is mocked by fools. B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort. C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction that she doesn't like. D: Jet claims to have killfiled me. E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup ...despite (D) above. F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a response until their behavior improves. G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn. -- Subject: Re: Where did all my windows go? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin) Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2000 19:38:34 GMT [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert) wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Your feeble attempt at patronising me not withstanding, Charlie, I read that book cover to cover. Pete -- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) Subject: Re: LIE-nux is SUPPOST to destroy data (was: Re: This is a Troll, do not resond (was Re: Linux is
Linux-Advocacy Digest #457
Linux-Advocacy Digest #457, Volume #26 Thu, 11 May 00 13:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: How to properly process e-mail (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: A pox on the penguin? (Linux Virus Epidemic) (JEDIDIAH)
Re: How to properly process e-mail (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Not so fast... (Tim Kelley)
Re: How to properly process e-mail (JEDIDIAH)
Re: How to properly process e-mail (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software (josco)
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software (josco)
Re: How to properly process e-mail (JEDIDIAH)
Re: win millenium (Tim Kelley)
Re: How to properly process e-mail (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: How to properly process e-mail (Angus Cameron)
Re: Here is the solution (Joe Ragosta)
Slashdot is down ("Francis Van Aeken")
Re: How to properly process e-mail (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: How to properly process e-mail ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: German Govt says Microsoft a security risk (Matthias Warkus)
Re: This is Bullsh^%T!!! (JEDIDIAH)
Re: What have you done? (JEDIDIAH)
Re: A pox on the penguin? (Linux Virus Epidemic) (Bob Hauck)
Re: Which distribution (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Here is the solution (josco)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How to properly process e-mail
Date: 11 May 2000 11:18:24 -0500
In article 8fdju4$4ic$[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Christopher Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I didn't, which is why I am still asking questions. Is the
difference
between an image and a script obvious in preview mode or not? That
is, can you tell if 'open' is dangereous?
Yes. Different icon, different file extension.
So how does that tell you what is going to happen?
If you "open" something that can execute code, it's very dangerous.
Obviously, and easy to say after the fact. How do you tell the
first time you see a new type?
How do you tell, the first time you see a .exe file ?
Assuming you understand program execution at all, you know that
the .exe file will have the power to do anything that your
own permissions allow. Does outlook directly execute an
exe file if you try to open it?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: A pox on the penguin? (Linux Virus Epidemic)
Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 16:20:37 GMT
On Thu, 11 May 2000 05:46:12 -0700, John Culleton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
OK lets return to the original question. Is it possible to hurt
a Linux system through a mail bomb type of attachment to email?
Is it possible for an ordinary user (not root) to destroy the
system from a terminal? I think we can all concede that any
system can be destroyed from the console and any system can be
destroyed by one with superuser privileges.
A part of the problem here is that Linux source code is available
to anyone. If you have a plan of the castle it is easier to
attack it. But I would like to see/hear about a successful attack
strategy through terminal access, ftp, mail, whatever that does
not involve prior knowledge of the root password. (Attacks that
ferret out the root password through some strategy are valid.)
It's plenty easy to get root using an exploit of some kind
if you really know what you're doing. Taking some simple
steps can dramatically decrease the likelihood of your
system being broken into however.
Restrincting remote terminal access to non-routable subnets
and trusted domains is a pretty good start. While not typically
set up by default properly on most distros, this can be put
into place with a fairly generic 'canned' configfile.
(/etc/hosts.deny)
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of'|||
a document? --Les Mikesell/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How to properly process e-mail
Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 16:22:11 GMT
On Thu, 11 May 2000 16:36:22 +1000, Christopher Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
"Leslie Mikesell" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:8fdcam$29kb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
In article 8fdb70$t4g$[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Christopher Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I didn't, which is why I am still asking questions. Is the
difference
between an image and a script obvious in preview mode or not? That
is, can you tell if 'open' is dangereous?
Yes. Different icon, different file extension.
So how does that tell you what is going to happen?
If you "open" something that can execute code, it's very dangerous.
Obviously, and easy to say after the fact. How do you tell the
first time you see
