in Windows i like using the Command Prompt for Certain Utilities, due to enabling certain "switches"

Gerritt said:

So you don't know what SELinux is. Ok.



Checkpoint and Cisco won't give you their code for reasons that have nothing to do with security.

OpenBSD is widely regarded as the most secure of the OSes commonyly in use (except for things like Trusted Solaris). The source code is completely open.

Perhaps you could contact Theo de Raadt and explain to him how OpenBSD isn't secure because the source is open? Or maybe contact Dan Bernstein and tell him that _his_ software like Qmail isn't secure because the source code is available. Go ahead, I dare you.

Again, you're trying to say that security through obscurity is a good thing, and it just isn't if you want good security.

McFly said:

Pico or nano can also be used for this type of thing, and may be easier for the beginner.

I do strongly suggest that people learn to at least use the basic functions of vi though. You can pretty much count on vi being available on any unix-like system right out of the box, which is not true of most other editors. The butt you save by learning vi may be your own.

I haven't used pico or nano much, I generally use emacs, but like you said, on some systems, esspecially with limited storage like an embedded device, you're almost always going to see vi around.

Who was saying that SELinux is closed source ... ? That's completely false, you can download the source here: http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/code. There's no way it would have found it's way into popular distro's otherwise.

As far as I'm concerned, if you're just learning how to use the GUI, then you're not learning Linux - you're learning X ... not the same thing.

Hi all: As a number of Linux distributions have been mentioned here I have a few comments. I've tried a few of them, the prime thing for a complete switch over being the inability to find equivalent programs in Linux (or run the Windows programs in emulation mode successfully). I have a number of useful and expensive programs.

I even tried Knoppix which runs from a disc as this Ubuntu does.

At school we used Red Hat Fedora in a class I took and it worked well enough for what we were doing; but, until I get a system I like to work at home I am still just dabbling so to speak. It takes day in and day out use to get efficient at anything.

I'd like to wean myself off Windows if possible. Here is my question to this group, "Has anyone tried out LinuxXP yet?"

I stumbled on this distro and downloaded it but have not quite had the nerve to load it.

Harry

How can i use this on the 965 chipset.I Downloaded the 32 and 64 bit version and neither will run on my setup.Even when i dont use raid it wont run.Anyone using these with the J micron driver

I didn't say, or at least didn't mean to say that SELinux was closed source, what I was refering to is this particular distros installation defaults to a more closed, rather than open state, as well as a higher security criteria on the processes included in the distro. I got involved with GNU and FSF around 1990, so the ideas an philosophies of this organization are not foreign to me.

Are Linux and BSD securable? Yes. To a degree. With millions of programmers with the access to the source code in a multi-purpose OS the POSSIBILITY of a crack, or exploit is much higher than that exhibited by a well engineered, closed source, specific purpose OS, even if the Open Source code is properly reviewed. Some may argue, and I do have to agree somewhat, that many minds working a problem are more likely to uncover and patch deficient code. The problem is that not all of these programmers are operating out of the same motivation of doing good for all computer users everywhere, but for more selfish purposes.
Both the RSA-56 and SHA (vetted by the NIST), were open to public review and when published, RSA-56 stated a 10,000 year break time, but was broken over a period of 10 MONTHS by a grad student using distributed computing (not that I have anything against the guy, he was just showing an alternative approach to problem solving), and SHA lasted less than 1 year until it was withdrawn and replaced by SHA-1, which is now being replaced by SHA-2.

I mentioned the Cisco PIX as an example of a closed source system. Cisco did not develop the PIX OS, but purchased and expanded on a technology that has very little exposure outside of their own CLOSED development community, and it remains, over a decade later, a very viable, reliable security appliance. The only way through this device is through mis-configuration, though it is not as robust against Denial of Service attacks as some other products.

I personally use a majorly tweaked SuSE Linux platform where I need to use Linux, unfortunately they were purchaced by Novell, and I've seen way too many good products go down the tubes when Novell took them over.....

So, what I'm trying to say is that I'm not arguing against Linux, just the perception that it is somehow more secure than other general purpose OSs. As the userbase for Linux and Apple MAC/OS increases, this perception is evaporating; as they are now becomming more viable targets for attack.

I didn't intend to stomp all over your belief system, we all know thats a zero gain situation. I just wanted to point out that some of your prejudices could lead to a mid to longterm exposure that was unintentional.
My appologies to you and your oatmeal.

Gerritt

does any one here know how to use the Gnome Partition application in ubuntu? i want to partition a small 5-10GB chunk of my HDD to run ubuntu. if you know, can you give me step by step instructions?

Elmo,
I'm not a Ubuntu Guru, but this should be pretty straight forward, unless it (Ubuntu) has a offset limitation, this is to say that the Linux boot partition has to be within a certain "distance" from the start of "disk space". Most OS's do have this, but can be bypassed in a few different manners.
1. Have a MBA, boot manager at the start of disk space.
2. Not having a boot manager, use something like Partition magic to shift your present partitions, leaving the space up front for a new install.
3. In the case of MS XP/Vista, there are other issues, especially if you are adding an additional OS, but in this case you need to be sure that you are not obliterating the criteria associated with these OSs. When I had 9 OSs loaded, I used to use System Commander in addition to Partition Magic, but I don't even know if these applications are still applicable under Vista.

Good luck....hopefully someone else can provide better "line item" support.

Gerritt

McFly said:
What you forgot to mention is when and if you decide you don't want that program after all, Synaptic will *completely* remove all traces - how many times have I uninstalled stuff in Windows only to find the folder lives on in Program Files, the icon and menu references stick to my system with dogged determination, not to mention the all the references to that app in the Registry. No wonder the computer goes slower and slower. Yes, there are registry cleaners, and you can always delete the folder and menu entries, but it's an extra thing to do. I guess it's what you're used to.

McFly said:
Actually, if you remember from older versions of Windows, a lot that you now do in the Registry you *used* to do in .ini files. Wasn't that a bit like opening .conf files in Linux is now-a-days?

FingerMeElmo87 said:
There is a great step-by-step instruction page at:

http://www.matthewjmiller.net/howtos/dual-boot-linux-and-windows

Follow it to the letter - you can't go wrong.

Gerritt said:

That's a pretty bold statement. Without access to the source code, how could you be sure of it?

(Edit - for the record, I'm not asking this question to be a smartass. I think it's a very important angle to consider - along with, as you mentioned, the downsides to allowing everyone access to the source)

Robyn Hahn said:

To some extent, although Windows 1, 2, and 3.x had a tendency for everything to get stuffed into one main win.ini file and that lead to a lot of problems. (Which is one of the reasons why MS moved to a binary "registry" later on.)

You can argue the worth of flat files or a binary database file either way. However, flat (text) files often make it easier to get things working again in case of a disaster since you don't need anything fancy to work on them.

Big Beavis said:

But Cisco says it's completely secure...

PIXes are ok for small companies, but they're horrible once you get to enterprise level and need to manage a large network.

I also don't think that the PIX is any better than any number of open source alternatives. OpenBSD, for instance, makes for a very robust firewall and it has a better security record.

I tend to point people towards Astaro or Checkpoint FW1 if they don't feel OpenBSD is suitable for whatever reason. Both are also available on an appliance-type platform like the PIX is.

Robyn Hahn said:
Not to mention that there are a lot of third party extensions for some of the free software that comes with Linux. Sure, Firefox can install its own extensions like no one's business, but when you get to installing new languages into an IDE, (integrated development environment) amongst other programs, then you start to get into some heavy duty manual configuration, something the average user probably doesn't want to get into.

Bobby Phillipps said:

Does this even apply to the "average user?" I wouldn't say that installing new languages into an IDE is something the "average user" is going to be doing.

There are always going to be tasks that are more than the "average user" wants to get into, but that applies to any OS and the software running on it.

Synaptic will do what the "average user" wants, and also works for more advanced users. It strikes me as a rather good frontend to a very powerful system (.deb package format, dpkg, apt, the package repositories, etc.)

I had a workstation on my desk at a previous job that went through a few Debian releases via upgrades. I installed and uninstalled a ton of software over the years and there still wasn't much cruft left over. It ran until the power supply died, about 7 years later, and never needed a re-install of the OS. I attribute that to the Debian package system.

Don't have to download, free Ubuntu copies are available.

I scanned thru the other comments and didn't see this, but the article failed to mention that if you can't download the programs, or it'll take too much time cause you have a 56kbps modem or something, you can supposedly request a FREE copy thru Canonical Services. I've not done this myself, so don't know the specifics of how it works. The Canonical site is http://www.canonical.com/

I might add that even if you have a fast connection, it can take a long time to download the ~700MB file(s) My downloads from the ubuntu site often start at >1000KB/sec (with an estimated download time of under 20minutes) and within 10 seconds the download degenerates to about 80KB/sec with a download time over 2 hours.


As of 20070430: http://www.ubuntux.org/ubuntu
"Ubuntu ships as an ISO image that fits on a single CD or alternatively, in the case of the older version, Dapper Drake 6.06 LTS, and just released Feisty Fawn 7.04,[13] mailed free to anyone requesting them via Canonical's ShipIt service.[14] This is intended to reduce the amount of time it takes to download Ubuntu and the possibility of losing part of the installation software and/or to aid those users who are not comfortable/able to burn an ISO image to CD."

Dell just upped the ante, by offering Ubuntu (among others) as a preinstalled OS on Dell PCs.

Ideas in action
http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/ideastorm/ideas...&s=gen

Best regards,

Stuart Krivis said:
For the record, I was citing a personal experience I had with Linux, and I'm damn sure there are other programs where installing a third party plug-in is more than a hassle.

The version of Ubuntu I was using at the time (6.06 Dapper Drake) had a package that would install the Synaptics software. Oddly, it didn't work, though. *shrugs*

Who knows, maybe it just didn't install correctly.