Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Security > Newbie question: If you don't host a website, and....

Reply
Thread Tools

Newbie question: If you don't host a website, and....

 
 
Brad
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-29-2006
Oh, and sorry I forgot to mention that many routers label this PAT as a
"firewall" and it performs its job very well but in my opinion does not
substitute a software firewall like zone alarm if your a windows user.
PAT/NAT wont protect you entirely I know guys who work just programming
Access Lists to be used with PAT/NAT and firewalls.

Most routers have a version of PAT/NAT if they have more than one
connection (and permit more than one host connected at the same time)
eg 4 LAN ports or an Wireless access point. Its just they may not have
the marketing department to write "FIREWALL" on the box!

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
q_q_anonymous@yahoo.co.uk
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-30-2006

dave wrote:
> Thanks, from dave. That is a helpful reply that I can understand. I'm
> a biologist, not an engineer; and I started trying to get rid of M$ in
> the
> late 90's, because I was wasting so much time trying to fix Win
> problems.
> They said linux was safe, stable, and "free"; so I started trying as a
> newbie
> and wasted a lot more time (on *early* releases of Caldera, Mandrake,
> Suse,
> Debian etc). I had no background in unix, and wasted more time
> learning
> some "Pi" or "emacs" or something. Someone said he would help if I
> would
> send him a 'log' of something. I did. Then, I realized that it had
> ALL of my
> passwords. Hmm. Was that helpful?
>
> Then, I heard someone quip that "Linux was free, if you placed no value
> on your time". Frustration. I sought help from newbie newsgroups.
> Someone
> said that we professionals (who were not engineers) should class-action
> sue Bill Gates for the cumulative value of our lost time. Then he
> wouldn't be a
> billionaire anymore. Somebody had already thrown a pie at his face in
> Paris.
>
> So, I *really* appreciate simple,clear advice; instead of referral to
> some
> arcane site where I don't understand anything. Thanks again, dave


glad I could help.

I have a friend , very well respected in academia, he uses Linux for
science work. He wouldn't touch emacs or vi. He told me that he uses
WINE in linux which let him run windows software in linux. Though now,
he says that Open Office for Linux has reached a level where it's very
good. He used to hate the linux GUI, though now he says that KDE has
got better. So, it is possible for Linux to do non computer work as
efficiently as Windows. Though that particular individual is very
unusual. A bit of a James Bond character, taught himself to drive, a
genius at doing anything in the most efficient way possible. Works in
many diff fields of science and still has time left. He's not a linux
wiz, but he gets things working and he gets things done. He is
obviously an exception.
**point being, it is possible to work well in linux , if you wanted to,
then perhaps some of his methods would help **

Most of the people that use linux are not people that don't value their
time. But they are people whose job it is to maintain systems. Or whose
main Goal in life is studying systems , learning how things work. Some
people < 30 do this for many years even at the expense of not having a
job.

I work in windows at the moment. I have used windows for years, and
have learnt a few things that allow me to use it without problems. I'd
happily share my tips if you choose to use windows again.
**So, my point there, is that there are ways to use windows where you
won't run into problems. It's alot easier than learning linux and
getting around linux problems**

I was using Windows 98 until Jan 2005. I (rightly) put off installing
Windows XP because I knew it'd have issues, and I was comfortable with
Windows 98. So, rather than switch over to win xp and get frustrated,
I set up another machine.
With one computer running windows 98 and another running Windows XP, I
had a far stabler, more reliable environment. Just as I have a dial up
connection (as a backup) and a 'broadband' connection. Now i'm
comfortable with Windows XP. I put Win XP on both computers.

I will learn linux, because a major goal in my life is understanding
computers. But, I'm going to wait until I can afford to set up a bunch
of computers. I have studied a bit about networks - routers, switches,
firewalls ,tcp/ip, and am interested only in the command line. Setting
up *nix on a few machines - whilst perhaps having on or two other
windows computers around, will be good. My practical experiments with
computesr, won't get in the way of the computesr I use for 'working' -
typing notes and thoughts about stuff I have learnt .

When a company changes from one system to another, they often run both
systems, the current and the potential new system, in parallel before
making the changeover.

It is very worthwhile to have - say - 2 computers. Connected up to
one monitor keyboard and mouse. This can be done with a 2 port KVM
Switch. Or even forget the KVM switch, and just have 2 boxes. If one
is giving you software or OS trouble, then use the other one. At
worse you'll have to reinstall the OS and software of the one with
problems. Not really a problem if you've got another computer to work
on. You don't need to wait around doing nothing as things reinstall on
the troubled computer.

With Windows, some peoples' computers have gone slow from malware. That
is generally from using internet explorer to browse sites containing
either porn or cracked software. Those sites are often doubly dubious ,
exploit internet explorer and install malware on the computer.

Firefox would avoid most of that malware

It might be something to worry about if you to internet banking. Or if
it has slowed down your computer making it too much of a nuisance to
use.

If it's a nuisance, and you want to take action, then, at worst, you'd
have to reinstall windows. But you needen't even havae to do that
ever.
I recommend having all data within one directory so that it can be
backed up easily,
And also, a program like Norton Ghost. I started using it at v9. It's
GUI based and works very well. When the hard drive is as you want it,
windows running flawlessly, all your progarms installed. You make an
image of the hard drive. Then if things go wrong, you just write the
image back. All v. quick. Don't even have to reinstall windows!
(of course, this works for linux too)
























The people that use linux for their real work

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Moe Trin
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-30-2006
On 29 Jan 2006, in the Usenet newsgroup alt.computer.security, in article
<(E-Mail Removed) .com>,
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>I will learn linux, because a major goal in my life is understanding
>computers. But, I'm going to wait until I can afford to set up a bunch
>of computers. I have studied a bit about networks - routers, switches,
>firewalls ,tcp/ip, and am interested only in the command line.


Google for a thing called a "Live CD" version of Linux. Some of the
many names are 'BEERnix', 'Damnsmall', 'Dyne:bolic', 'Gibraltar', 'Jollix',
'Knoppix', 'Lamppix', 'LinEspa', 'Mepis', and 'Slax'. This gives you a
full Linux operating system, but because the CD is not 'read-write', you
can't easily save your files unless you use a floppy, or are willing to
save to your hard drive. It won't touch your hardware unless you
specifically make it do so. There are also floppy only systems, though
given the small size of a floppy, you can only put so much "stuff" on one.
Toms 'Root n Boot' (tomsrtbt) is an example of that, and there are others.
See http://www.distrowatch.com/

>I recommend having all data within one directory so that it can be
>backed up easily,


[compton ~]$ find . -type f | wc -l
4758
[compton ~]$

That says I've got 4758 files in my home directories. That would be
rather useless on one screen. Doesn't your backup scheme understand
the word 'recursive'?

[compton ~]$ find . -type d | wc -l
205
[compton ~]$

Here, there are 205 directories in my home directory, with everything
from projects I am working on, to mail and personal configuration files
for my browser, editor, news and mail tools. No need to dump all of that
into one pile.

Old guy
 
Reply With Quote
 
q_q_anonymous@yahoo.co.uk
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-31-2006

Moe Trin wrote:
> On 29 Jan 2006, in the Usenet newsgroup alt.computer.security, in article
> <(E-Mail Removed) .com>,
> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> >I will learn linux, because a major goal in my life is understanding
> >computers. But, I'm going to wait until I can afford to set up a bunch
> >of computers. I have studied a bit about networks - routers, switches,
> >firewalls ,tcp/ip, and am interested only in the command line.

>
> Google for a thing called a "Live CD" version of Linux. Some of the
> many names are 'BEERnix', 'Damnsmall', 'Dyne:bolic', 'Gibraltar', 'Jollix',
> 'Knoppix', 'Lamppix', 'LinEspa', 'Mepis', and 'Slax'. This gives you a
> full Linux operating system, but because the CD is not 'read-write', you
> can't easily save your files unless you use a floppy, or are willing to
> save to your hard drive. It won't touch your hardware unless you
> specifically make it do so. There are also floppy only systems, though
> given the small size of a floppy, you can only put so much "stuff" on one.
> Toms 'Root n Boot' (tomsrtbt) is an example of that, and there are others.
> See http://www.distrowatch.com/


oh, i'm an eccentric. Computer boxes are far away from me with a KVM
Extender. I try to avoid booting from CDs. Also, when I do play with
*nix, i'll use some fully featured thing. Not a CD.



> >I recommend having all data within one directory so that it can be
> >backed up easily,

>
> [compton ~]$ find . -type f | wc -l
> 4758
> [compton ~]$
>
> That says I've got 4758 files in my home directories. That would be
> rather useless on one screen. Doesn't your backup scheme understand
> the word 'recursive'?
>
> [compton ~]$ find . -type d | wc -l
> 205
> [compton ~]$
>
> Here, there are 205 directories in my home directory, with everything
> from projects I am working on, to mail and personal configuration files
> for my browser, editor, news and mail tools. No need to dump all of that
> into one pile.
>


I'm not that into linux yet, so may have misinterpreted you, but it
sounds like a similar system to me then. When I said I have all my data
in one directory, I didn't mean without subdirectories.

D:\DATA>dir /ad
....
44 Dir(s)
D:\DATA>

err, 42 actually. DOS includes "." and ".." in its count, when not in
the root directory. I think.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Winged
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-31-2006
dave wrote:
> Winged wrote : "It is easy to make an "opps" in configuring a system,
> especially for a newbie, and a firewall will help protect you from
> yourself."
>
> ans: Yes, I need all the help I can get...
>
> Todd H wrote: "However, misconfiguration is easy to do (e.g. how much
> do you know about ipchains rule writing?),"...
>
> ans: Nothing
>
> "so for the whopping $50 it costs to get a router with a firewall in
> it, why not have the extra layer of protection?"
>
> That sounds well worth it to me !! I'm running Xandros 3.0 Linux
> very happily, with a NetCard in the PCMCIA slot. The cable
> goes to an old Bell Atlantic DSL modem, which of course connects
> to the telephone line (the ISP provider is Verizon).
>
> Would you kindly suggest what router to buy, and how I should
> connect it up? I would guess that it is between NetCard and
> DSL Modem. Right? Is there a chance that the router would
> screw up my presently-OK Verizon connection and send me back
> to square ONE ?? Verizon wasted hours of my time, before
> finally kicking me up to Tech Level 3 and getting me
> connected in 3 minutes. I don't want to start all over again.
>
> Thanks for your patience, and in advance for your advice,
>
> dave
>


I would be bad advice. I use a statefull firewall (cisco 501 pix (yes
overpriced but I know the device quirks as i use its bigger brother in a
business network) as well as a linux firewall in a VM. While I like my
config, it's not for everbody. Using a software nix firewall is
probably enough for most folks. In my config the hardware pix sits
between local network and outside connector. The wireless sits on it's
own VLAN (DMZ) with limited access to local network internals.

Winged
 
Reply With Quote
 
Moe Trin
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-31-2006
On 30 Jan 2006, in the Usenet newsgroup alt.computer.security, in article
<(E-Mail Removed) .com>,
(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

>Also, when I do play with *nix, i'll use some fully featured thing. Not
>a CD.


By in large, the only "feature" missing from the Live CD versions is the
ability to save files to the CD (given it's a Read Only media, that should
not be surprising). Remember that a Live CD will work in a computer that
doesn't even had floppy or hard disks. The normal distributions - whether
*BSD, Linux, or the "free" version of Solaris would normally require a
partition of their own on a disk, because they don't use the FAT, VFAT,
or NTFS filesystems due to missing capabilities that are otherwise needed
in *nix (ownership, permissions, links). It is also normal to have a 'swap
partition' (though it can be a swap file) to move (currently) unused
segments of programs or data out of RAM automagically so that the RAM
can be used for "stuff" you are doing right now. In the past, this
separation of operating systems was generally done using a "spare"
partition on the existing hard drive, but drives are so cheap today, it's
easier to throw in an extra drive, and install to that.

>I'm not that into linux yet, so may have misinterpreted you, but it
>sounds like a similar system to me then. When I said I have all my data
>in one directory, I didn't mean without subdirectories.


Hard as it may be to believe, DOS started out without the concept of
directories, and there are still a lot of people who think that is the
norm.

>err, 42 actually. DOS includes "." and ".." in its count, when not in
>the root directory. I think.


I suppose it's how you want to count. "." should be included, because you
can actually put stuff in there. ".." should not, because it doesn't
exist at the top of the tree (there is nothing "above" C:\ or D:\), and
below that point (as in C:\DOS\ - or similar), you have to specify it
to reach it - down is fine, up is not a default).

Old guy
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

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 On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
how to refer a control in the host page from a user control if the host page using masterpage Jerry Qu ASP .Net 1 02-20-2009 07:41 PM
Dane Cook: Great S.N.L. host or GREATEST S.N.L. host? Jojo the 90lb hottie Digital Photography 1 02-14-2007 04:55 AM
Cisco PIX 501 - Port forwarded to an internal host via Static NAT doesn't work from internal host JoelSeph Cisco 9 01-23-2006 03:52 PM
PIX: how to allow 1 host from outside interface to access another host on the inside interface? jonnah Cisco 1 04-21-2004 02:26 PM
request.getHeader("Host") returns wrong host name Orpheus66 Java 0 07-30-2003 02:59 PM



Advertisments