#bash

01 January 2008

Total 9 pages. You are browsing page 1/9.

First :: Prev :: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [...] :: Next :: Last

--- Log opened Tue Jan 01 00:00:04 2008
00:00 <****> \amethyst: ah. you are specifically thinking of "software application"
00:00 <****> more likely to get VC money anyway
00:00 <****> but the problem there si that the goals of linux are not unilateral to the etire community they are a different to every distributions own community
00:00 <****> Happy New Year all.
00:00 <****> i.e. a program which runs on lnux only?
00:00 <****> and you want to sell
00:00 <****> Bushmills: or a port of an existing program to Linux
00:01 <****> Bushmills: where "program" might be a device driver
00:01 <****> virtualization might make all these arguments moot
00:01 <****> but ... when you get more users to use linux .. you have less users of the system from where it has been ported.
00:01 <****> so, it is a zero-sum calculation
00:01 <****> Je vous souhaite une très très mauvaise année et allez tous creuver.
00:01 <****> M3phistopl3s: distros are roads, and water/sewer pipes. the next layer will be more narrowly focused applications.
00:02 <****> savetheWorld: i agree
00:02 <****> Bushmills: it's only zero sum if the OS market is fixed-size :)
00:02 <****> Bushmills: yes and no - with distros supply the base infrastructure for close to free, all other software companies must move upmarket to specific tools.
00:02 <****> One particular product that comes to mind is Juniper's JunOS, it's very cleverly designed on top of Freebsd/i386.
00:02 <****> I really like it (heh and their hardware)
00:03 <****> Bushmills: (e.g. if I had to pay for Windows each time I would have fewer computers than I currently do)
00:03 <****> *nod*
00:04 <****> savetheWorld, you make interesting points i would love you to elaborate a lil
00:04 <****> \amethyst: ok, I could agree with that if there's a larger user base, there are more proprietary device drivers
00:04 <****> M3phistopl3s: Goad me! :-)
00:04 <****> If I have to pay for each licence for each OS, I'd be VERY poor..... That's NetBSD, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, Plan 9, Windows, Solaris, two copies of Ubuntu.... and at (say) $200 each OS, I couldn't even afford to install one, let alone all those.
00:04 <****> M3phistopl3s: which point?
00:04 <****> that prospect alone does not make we wish a larger user base
00:04 <****> Bushmills: and more free device drivers too
00:04 <****> on the application level one if you would
00:04 <****> \amethyst: why, will those users write device drivers?
00:05 <****> hm. Cos we need them?
00:05 <****> Bushmills: lots of companies (e.g. Intel) write free device drivers too
00:05 <****> or help write them
00:05 <****> i.e. I have a tablet I'd like to kick into life. I'm seriously thinking of writing the driver myself.
00:06 <****> Viking667: but you are using linux already. you are not one of the massed to be attracted just to increase the user base. the code meat, in a manner of speaking.
00:06 <****> Bushmills: how about this - the malware people are winning tghe security wars and will continue to do so as long as there isa large population of MS based computers on the web. by movving most of them to Linux/BSD that conflict will go the other way and the malware makers will lose
00:06 <****> savetheWorld: let them focus on one system.
00:07 <****> savetheWorld: I doubt that... it would be just one more step in the arms race
00:07 <****> Bushmills: mrmm. Valid point.
00:08 <****> Bushmills: ameth no - because of differences in design *NIX system are much less vulnerable to malware exploits. Its not simply a matter of malware attacking MS stuff becuase its the populous
00:08 <****> savetheWorld: Have you heard of the Great Worm (AKA the rtm worm?)
00:08 <****> savetheWorld: I don't think linux needs just numbers of users. linux needs quality users
00:08 <****> savetheWorld: it wasn't a Windows program
00:09 <****> and to that end, its reputation of being a very technical system is just great
00:09 <****> no need to make another windows from linux
00:09 <****> savetheWorld: Unix does have advantages over Windows for security, but to claim that Linux is unbreakable and insusceptible to malware is irresponsible
00:09 <****> for no other reason than to attract masses
00:09 <****> \amethyst: who claimed it was unbreakable?
00:10 <****> Larry Ellison
00:10 <****> rickest: well he's wrong. :-)
00:10 <****> people don't need to be missionarised towards using luinux
00:10 <****> savetheWorld: I guess I took your claim that "the malware makers will lose" as stronger than you intended
00:10 <****> linux
00:10 <****> if they're interested enough, they'll look at it
00:10 <****> no kidding. you don't rememeber his "Unbreakable Linux" campaign about 5 yrs ago. With RH9 I believe
00:10 <****> if not, why should you want that user?
00:11 <****> I dont see why (current) linux users are threatened by a large user base attracting more malware. The current userbase is (generally) smart enough to know how to prevent such things and at worst it will create stronger code for all the auditing the malware writers will do for us.
00:11 <****> \amethyst: ah, I try not to take absolute positions. I've been humbled many times. :-) The point on my head has been hammered so many times in now goes into my skull .. :-)
00:11 <****> struggling for user numbers is a market mechanism
00:12 <****> SiegeX6: more importantly thebasic design of Linux/UNIX makes privelege escalation harder to achieve
00:12 <****> the feeback/patch rate for linux in my opinion is fast enough to handle the malware thrown at it and it could actually be good for it in the longterm.
00:12 <****> SiegeX6: \amethyst Bushmills http://aplawrence.com/Opinion/unix-viruses.html
00:13 <****> yet while still providing an environment to actually use/install apps. I tried to run windows as just a user, but everything I wnated to install requireda dmin privs, so i just run as admin anyways.
00:13 <****> savetheWorld: I guess my concern is that you don't need privilege escalation for malware
00:13 <****> you don't need to become root to hijack someone's web browser configuration---running as that user is enough
00:13 <****> kind of difficult to use windows without being an admin, unless you're in a heavily controlled environment.
00:14 <****> \amethyst: But you do, if you dont have it the malware cannot hide itself.
00:14 <****> the extent of damage a virus can do would be different without privilege escalation. but for the affected user, the damage would be just as high
00:14 <****> Bushmills: You mean the user can lose their data?
00:15 <****> he'd be happy to know that the (freely and easily obtainable) system software didn't suffer damage
00:15 <****> savetheWorld: yes
00:15 <****> savetheWorld: malware needs to hide itself from you or I, but we're not the people the malware authors try to target
00:15 <****> \amethyst: malware needs to hide from tools that try to find it and purge it.
00:16 <****> as Linux become more popular the AV fols will relase the same toolsfo Linux that they ahve made for Windows
00:16 <****> savetheWorld: so you're back in the arms race :)
00:16 <****> not atm, as only few linux admin check for break-in. most feel pretty safe.
00:16 <****> well it's a lot easier to find crap in ~/.mozilla than C:\D&S\User\Local Settings\{akbje-fadjf-1345x-asfed}.blah_blah and the registry
00:16 <****> \amethyst: but its a different war now, because the design of Linux is not as easy to exploit
00:17 <****> also, privilege escalation isn't always that hard
00:17 <****> \amethyst: well rick moen disagrees with you.
00:17 <****> there is also the user.
00:17 <****> you know, as cpu speeds and diskspace increases, we could have an OS that ran every new process its a virtualized environment, have the hypervisor detect the changes and use heuristics to determine if the result was good/bad/questionable
00:18 <****> SiegeX6: security contexts already do much but not all of that
00:18 <****> often, not exploitable software, but poor system setup is the reason for exploitable systems
00:18 <****> SiegeX6: specifying the policy (or the heuristics) is the hard part
00:18 <****> ya, that would be
00:18 <****> for example, poorly chosen passwords, clear text password transmission, things like that
00:19 <****> plain text
00:19 <****> we should have a state issued OS licence and it may be suspended or you have to go to security school to get the points taken off =)
00:20 <****> hah.Yeah, right
00:20 <****> SiegeX6: why not "don't attract users who are overwhelmed with a bit of sys admin"?
00:21 <****> SiegeX6: your ISP will disconnect you if you are too bad at security :)
00:21 <****> because, "free software" probably does also include the freedom to use it ...
00:21 <****> can software which you aren't allowed to use if your OS license isn't up to it be free?
00:21 <****> because i think many are that way not because they want to be but because they dont know otherwise.
00:22 <****> Ah, here it is - An excellent and quite possibly definitive discussion on the difference in the dynamics of virii on *NIX systems vs MS Win. http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/index.php?page=virus#virus4
00:22 <****> doesn't it sound stupid, to first try to attract loads of users, and then don't allow them to use the system?
00:23 <****> I was just being fecisous with the license thing
00:23 <****> and it wouldn't be practical, I am aware of it
00:24 <****> still, it underlines a bit the controverse demands stated

Total 9 pages. You are browsing page 1/9.

First :: Prev :: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [...] :: Next :: Last