LinuxQuestions.org
Register a domain and help support LQ
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Newbie
User Name
Password
Linux - Newbie This Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question? If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 10-09-2003, 11:06 AM   #16
yapp
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2003
Location: Netherlands
Distribution: SuSE (before: Gentoo, Slackware)
Posts: 613

Rep: Reputation: 30

Quote:
Originally posted by abbasakhtar
i jus dont like the fact i cant see wot im donig (commands, visual interface, etc.)
same here and if Windows can give you this, you should be happy.

I just don't like the idea that I can't ask my system what it's really doing try ("ps auxf", and you'll see what I mean), nor ask what happened when, for example the GUI doesn't load ("tail -f /var/log/...."), or I have a network problem. ("tcpdump ..")

I once asked a similar question to a linux guru... how do you have this "overview" of what you are doing? All I saw was, some coding in the shell. He just said it takes some time to get used to it, but you'll have the overview anyway. It's just different.

When I'm back in windows, I'm missing these kind of things. At the login I see "Applying security policy", and I'd like to know why this takes half a minute same for the boot process..
 
Old 10-09-2003, 12:16 PM   #17
motub
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: The Netherlands
Distribution: Gentoo (main); SuSE 9.3 (fallback)
Posts: 1,607

Rep: Reputation: 46
Quote:
Originally posted by yapp
At the login I see "Applying security policy", and I'd like to know why this takes half a minute same for the boot process..
What, Windows doesn't let you hit F2 for a verbose boot?

Never tried it with the Windows bootsplash, but honestly, I would think it ought to work. High-level Windows users/programmers must need to see the boot process sometimes, as well.

It's nice to know that I do have some of these Linux defaults memorized. Just one more reason I love Linux-- it teaches me about how OSes actually work and actually helps me use Windows better (sometimes. Mostly it just makes me more dissatisfied with the things I can't do/see under Windows).
 
Old 10-09-2003, 01:55 PM   #18
prplant
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Posts: 6

Rep: Reputation: 0
I love both - it's not a religion to me... It's all about what your needs and goals are. To thine own self be true.

Unfortunately there are a lot of malicious bastardos out there that think it's funny to drain the US (not to mention, world) economy billions of dollars a year (that's how many jobs worth?) in their religious pursuit (zealousness) to show Windows' vulnerablilities. Every bit of software is vulnerable, I don't care who wrote it. Sure, I would agree that the surface area of attack in Windows might be greater than the Linux counterpart but that is rapidly changing.

Here is one other point to consider: how many more virus/worm writers (attackers-terrorists) are out there targeting Windows compared to Linux? I would bet the lefty that there are orders of magnitude more Penguin-Qaida out there than Windows-Hamas. That alone could account for the perceived differences in vulnerability arguments. It could be argued that if you had as many hackers targeting Linux as you do Windows the media might be painting a different picture about Linux.

I am going to take this to the dramatic extreme so make of it what you will... Hacking is electronic terrorism. Many will justify their hacking efforts and laugh at this parallel I draw but honestly, what is the difference? Billions of dollars and countless jobs are lost trying to put Humpty-Dumpty back together again and it is no different than any other act of terrorism because the intent is the same: malice. When is malice ever justified? A lot of people say they don't trust Microsoft's software... There may be reason to that, but who DO you trust then? Would you rather trust the community contrary to Microsoft that is primarily responsible for these attacks? To me, that's like Al-Qaida saying they don't trust the United States and its allies... Sure, they might have reason, but certainly not justification for their actions and ironically their actions are more volatile and mistrusted than perhaps the very entity that has spurned their creation.

Thoughts?
 
Old 10-10-2003, 04:45 AM   #19
yapp
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2003
Location: Netherlands
Distribution: SuSE (before: Gentoo, Slackware)
Posts: 613

Rep: Reputation: 30
sidenote: is this getting a little off-topic?

Quote:
Originally posted by prplant
I love both - it's not a religion to me... It's all about what your needs and goals are. To thine own self be true.
Good I hope my posts don't reflext the opposite, because I usually don't push people to use Linux.

Quote:
Originally posted by prplant
Here is one other point to consider: how many more virus/worm writers (attackers-terrorists) are out there targeting Windows compared to Linux? I would bet the lefty that there are orders of magnitude more Penguin-Qaida out there than Windows-Hamas.
Unix is used a lot more at the servers of the Internet compared to Windows. But Microsoft Windows is used a lot by home users, unaware of security. (and Windows doesn't help them much either ) This combination makes Windows an easy target. (and yes, a lot of people get annoyed by Microsoft, and do dumb things... sadly.)

Have your read this link? http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/56/33226.html It was posted at the previous page, and I think it's a good explaination why Linux doesn't have much viruses.

Unix was designed to handle multiple users at once, and they shouldn't be able to interfere with each other, nor interfere with the system. Windows was designed to be easy, you could do everything, without restrictions. They've choosen a different file structure. I've read several times that, security isn't yet another feature you can add later.

I wouldn't say Windows is insecure, you can secure it a lot too. A lot of sites run IIS, but this doesn't mean they get hacked every day. Both OSes have their own usage, public, and place in this world. Let a Linux newbie install a system, and he will not be aware of the services running, and the limited user account systems.

Quote:
Originally posted by prplant
I am going to take this to the dramatic extreme so make of it what you will... Hacking is electronic terrorism. Many will justify their hacking efforts and laugh at this parallel I draw but honestly, what is the difference? [...] Would you rather trust the community contrary to Microsoft that is primarily responsible for these attacks?
oke, I will. I hope you don't see this as a little flame. (I don't intend to be a smart-ass, I hope you can apreciate my comments)


* If we talk about "Hackers", we should mean those people that build the internet, unix, the web, mail systems.. etc..! people who see all kinds of interesting problems, and like to solve them. (I'm sorry, the web wasn't raised from some commercial point of view; and it would have looked different if it did) With hackers, we should mean people like Eric S. Raymond, Linus Tovalds, and Richard Stallman

If you're referring to those kids with too much free time, bash Microsoft, and think they are cool because they can "hack" (which they can't if you read this), I'd like to call them script-kiddies. And there are also people that like to break things.. and they are crackers.

Afaik, they are not directly related to Linux, the open source movement, or anything else in the community. Everyone has it's personal reasons for using Linux, but not all Linux users are script-kiddies or crackers . A lot of script-kiddies use Microsoft Windows anyway People like Eric S. Raymond even ask everyone to stop their attacks against SCO; though he invented the word open-source. Linus Torvalds never intended to destroy Microsoft.. Linux started as a hobby, without any ideals or what so ever; just wanted to know more about the i386 chipset. Richard Stallman started the free-software movement after unix became commercialized; to give the freedom back to the people.. these people are just in the mood to create the best software available, with a lot of help from others. If that scares Microsoft, I'd like to call that a side-effect. (and it did scare Microsoft in 1998)

Last edited by yapp; 10-10-2003 at 04:53 AM.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
if linux becomes popular, won't it become more vulnerable than windows lynchpin9 Linux - Security 8 01-25-2006 06:24 AM
Why Windows is so vulnerable to Virus and Worm ? TigerLinux Linux - Software 2 10-15-2005 08:04 AM
does wine make me vulnerable to windows virii? drigz Linux - General 3 08-03-2004 08:29 AM
Linux servers were the most vulnerable????? xgreen Linux - Security 12 02-23-2004 08:55 PM
How vulnerable is Linux Vincent_Vega Linux - Security 7 01-18-2004 07:44 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:12 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration