> 
> On Thu, 2005-02-10 at 18:09, Doug McLaren wrote: 
> 
> > On Thu, Feb 10, 2005 at 11:24:49AM -0600, William L. Jarrold wrote:
> > 
> > | When I see announcements like the below, I get really angry and I think 
> > | (to myself) stuff like...
> > | 
> > | (1) the security problem is that people use windows.
> > | 
> > | (2) If everyone  switched to unix/linux systems would be 99% (90%???, 
> > | 99.9%???) more secure.
> > 
> > 99.9% more secure = almost twice as secure.  I don't think you're
> > using the right terms to express yourself here.  However, to say
> > `99.9% fewer security' problems, which is probably closer to what you
> > really mean, is pretty difficult to believe.
> > 
> > | (3) Windows has serious misfeatures and bugs related to security.
> > 
> > To be fair, you've made some assertions here and not backed them up
> > with any facts whatsoever.  Granted, your audience probably doesn't
> > need them all explained, but even so, some examples are required.
> 
> 
> 



You want proof?Here is your proof >  (The system I scanned was supposed
to be "patched").





> 
> 
> 
> 
> > | (4) e.g. one such misfeature is that Winblows
> > 
> > Saying things like Winblows, Micro$oft (and Linsux and Slowlaris) will
> > not convince anybody of anything except that you're a kook and best
> > ignored.
> > 
> > | thinks that every file is a program to be executed.  unix/linux, by
> > | contrast, implements the distinction between executable and
> > | non-executable files.
> > 
> > Windows does *not* think that every file is a program to be executed.
> > It generally decides how a program is to be executed based on it's
> > file extension (.exe, .cmd, etc.) where *nix does the exact same
> > thing, but it's based upon the first few bytes of the file (the magic
> > number.)
> > 
> > I do believe that the *nix `magic number' system is more powerful than
> > the Windows `file extension' system, but I wouldn't say that either is
> > really significantly more secure than the other.
> > 
> > In both *nix and Windows you can execute a program by giving the name
> > of the file to be executed to the name of the program that executes
> > it.  Like `perl file', `sh file', `cmd file' or `java file'.
> > 
> > | ...I don't yell (or at least, try not to (-;) this to all my friends bc 
> > my 
> > | understanding of these issues is primitive and quite likely wrong.  Thus, 
> > | trumpeted my views would risk being accused of "crying wolf." At the risk 
> > | of starting a flame war I would love to hear people improve upon the 
> > | above assertions.
> > | 
> > | To the extent that some approximation of assertions 1 thru 4 are true, 
> > | at least one person from this list should go to this meeting and as 
> > | calmly as possible  state/ask during the Q/A somethign to the effect of 
> > | "just get rid of windows, adopt unix/linux and 99% of your problems will 
> > | go away."
> > 
> > Of course, doing so will probably get you labeled as one of those
> > `linux weenies' and promptly ignored.  And that 99% figure is an
> > outright lie -- sure, most of their current problems will go away, but
> > they will be replaced with many new problems, and some of the old
> > problems will come back, but looking a little different.
> > 
> > You also need to understand the administration's goals -- Windows is
> > probably what most of the student body and faculty wants, and the
> > administration's goal is to give them what they want.  Now, the
> > administration may choose to give them what they *think* they want
> > rather than what they're asking for, but then you'll start getting
> > into some serious political issues.
> > 
> > Ultimately, most end users want Windows.  A few want Macs.  Fewer
> > still will want things like Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, AIX, etc.  Trying
> > to force one group to use something else is not going to be easy --
> > they'll fight you every step of the way, and even assuming that you
> > win that fight, there's still the issues of education and support.
> > 
> > One thing that can be done to make you seem like less of a zealot is
> > to not keep saying Linux, Linux, Linux.  Mix it up -- rather than
> > Linux, suggest a `Unix clone' -- Linus, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc.
> > 
> > Bring up examples of companies or other universities who have made the
> > switch, and talk about all the savings in licensing costs and support
> > hours, increased productivity, etc.  When somebody makes this sort of
> > switch and succeeds, they usually write all kinds of white papers and
> > such about it to brag about their accomplishment.  Capitalize upon
> > their success.
> > 
> > And lastly, don't get your hopes up.  Changing people's minds is hard,
> > and the odds are that you will not succeed.  That doesn't mean you
> > shouldn't try -- but you should be prepared for failure, and be
> > prepared to learn from your failure.
> > 
> > And before you dismiss me as a `Microsoft sympathizer', you should
> > probably know that that's about as far from the truth as you could
> > get.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Analabha Roy Graduate Student 
> 
> Department Of Physics, University of Texas, 1 University Station
> C1600,  Austin, Texas 78712-0264, United States  emails:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED],   Home Page:
> http://www.ph.utexas.edu/~daneel
> 
> Get Firefox!
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________


________________________________________________________________________
Analabha Roy Graduate Student 
Department Of Physics, University of Texas, 1 University Station C1600, 
Austin, Texas 78712-0264, United States  emails:
[EMAIL PROTECTED],   Home Page: http://www.ph.utexas.edu/~daneel
Get Firefox! 
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Siglinux mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.utacm.org:81/mailman/listinfo/siglinux

Reply via email to