Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > The hounds are after the fox. Great stuff

Reply
Thread Tools

The hounds are after the fox. Great stuff

 
 
Peter Ashby
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-23-2004
Max Burke <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > Peter Ashby scribbled:

>
> >> Max Burke wrote:

>
> >> Gordon scribbled:

>
> > There is a link off the mozilla.org page
> > http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=5404
> > Quote In part
> > Mozilla and Other Browsers Vulnerable to Tabbed Browsing Spoofing
> > Attack Wednesday October 20th, 2004

>
> >> Do you know about this recently discovered 'hole' in Mozilla browsers
> >> running on many major versions of Linux?
> >> http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/11440
> >> Snip the usual crap....
> >> ALL OS'es have bugs; ALL OS'es require patching. All software
> >> running on ANY OS has bugs. It's NOT something that is unique to
> >> Microsoft and windows. Why do so many 'advocates' for *nix/OSS want
> >> this fact to be a '****ing contest' as some sort of 'advocacy' for
> >> *nix/OSS is for them to justify and explain. I personally would
> >> prefer that they/you NOT use nz.comp and nz.general to justify and
> >> explain why they/you need to behave this way as a *nix/OSS
> >> user/advocate......

>
> > Of course instead of missing the point you could realise the point was
> > not the existence of bugs but how different companies/organisations
> > deal with them.

>
> No Peter, Gordons post was just another Microsoft bashing post.
> Funny how you deliberately ignored that....


The same way you deliberately ignored the point of the difference,
closing your mind because of the messenger.

Peter

--
Add my middle initial to email me. It has become attached to a country
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
nick
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2004

"Max Burke" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:izAed.13599$(E-Mail Removed)...


>
>> Most linux distros can update every installed application with a
>> single command.

>
> Every day?


Whenever you want.
Automatically if you like.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Allistar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2004
Max Burke wrote:

>> Allistar scribbled:

>
>>> Max Burke wrote:
>>> I subscribe to several security email lists, and have several
>>> Linux/OSS websites in my favourites list.
>>> Going by what I read there I get daily securtity email lists about
>>> Windows,
>>> *nix, etc and nearly those list far more *nix and OSS bugs than
>>> Microsoft bugs...
>>> Using *nix and OSS software requires almost DAILY updates and
>>> patches to fix these numerous bugs and fixes....
>>> How do YOU keep up with them all??????

>
>> emerge sync && emerge -pv world

>
>
> Every day?


Not normally. Maybe every few days.

> And how do you know what it's installing, what it's fixing, if it actually
> fixes that bugs, that it's compatiable, that it wont cause problems for
> yourself or your users...


The -pv switch tells it to only tell me what it will install/upgrade, not
actually do the upgrade for me. I then make a decisio non what to upgrade
and what not to.

> It's not a very 'safe' way to keep up to date is it....


It's safe enough for me.

Allistar.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Max Burke
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2004
> Peter Ashby scribbled:

>> Max Burke wrote:
>> No Peter, Gordons post was just another Microsoft bashing post.
>> Funny how you deliberately ignored that....


> The same way you deliberately ignored the point of the difference,
> closing your mind because of the messenger.


The point of Gordons post was to BASH Microsoft.

That is the point YOU are deliberately ignoring.


He claimed that it take Microsoft ages to fix bugs, while OSS fixes bugs
quickly. That was the *Microsoft BASHING* point of his post

That is BS.
How long have the bugs in OSS existed before they get found and fixed? Is
it just the current version? The last two versions? Or all prior versions
right up until the time the bug is discovered and FINALLY fixed.....

How long does it REALLY take the OSS community to fix the bugs in OSS...

ALL OS'es have bugs; ALL OS'es require patching. All software running on
ANY OS has bugs. It's NOT something that is unique to Microsoft and
windows. Why do so many 'advocates' for *nix/OSS want this fact to be a
'****ing contest' as some sort of 'advocacy' for *nix/OSS is for them to
justify and explain. I personally would prefer that they/you NOT use
nz.comp and nz.general to justify and explain why they/you need to behave
this way as a *nix/OSS user/advocate......

--
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)
Replace the obvious with paradise.net to email me
Found Images
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~mlvburke

 
Reply With Quote
 
Max Burke
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2004
> Allistar scribbled:

>> Max Burke wrote:
>> I subscribe to several security email lists, and have several
>> Linux/OSS websites in my favourites list.
>> Going by what I read there I get daily securtity email lists about
>> Windows,
>> *nix, etc and nearly those list far more *nix and OSS bugs than
>> Microsoft bugs...
>> Using *nix and OSS software requires almost DAILY updates and
>> patches to fix these numerous bugs and fixes....
>> How do YOU keep up with them all??????


>>> emerge sync && emerge -pv world


>> Every day?


> Not normally. Maybe every few days.


I only need to check that once a month, but XP SP2 will notify me if there
are updates available to install.
Now tell me why that is wrong, but what you do is right?
As far as I can see it's not much different....

>> And how do you know what it's installing, what it's fixing, if it
>> actually fixes that bugs, that it's compatiable, that it wont cause
>> problems for yourself or your users...


> The -pv switch tells it to only tell me what it will install/upgrade,
> not actually do the upgrade for me. I then make a decisio non what to
> upgrade and what not to.


Well gee, that is what I do, because *Microsoft* gives me (and everyone else
that uses a Microsoft OS) that exact same option. Tell me again why that's
wrong when it's a Microsoft OS Allistar, but right when it's not.....

--
(E-Mail Removed)
Replace the obvious with paradise.net to email me
Found Images
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~mlvburke

 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter Ashby
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2004
Max Burke <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > Peter Ashby scribbled:

>
> >> Max Burke wrote:
> >> No Peter, Gordons post was just another Microsoft bashing post.
> >> Funny how you deliberately ignored that....

>
> > The same way you deliberately ignored the point of the difference,
> > closing your mind because of the messenger.

>
> The point of Gordons post was to BASH Microsoft.
>
> That is the point YOU are deliberately ignoring.


You see those words 'the same way'? have you thought about what they
might mean?

And you are still ignoring the point which was about openness much more
than speed of response. I think that point was perfectly valid.

Peter
--
Add my middle initial to email me. It has become attached to a country
 
Reply With Quote
 
nick
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2004

"Max Burke" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:5uHed.14753$(E-Mail Removed)...
> How long does it REALLY take the OSS community to fix the bugs in OSS...


It varies, but its very fast indeed for the main projects that major linux
users like sun ibm hp, the distribution vendors and the majority of the
worlds internet service depend on, like the kernel, apache, proftpd, bind,
qmail samba etc. They prefer to be members of the "OSS community" because of
the rapid response that such a community effort can achieve.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2004
nick wrote:
> It varies, but its very fast indeed for the main projects that major linux
> users like sun ibm hp, the distribution vendors and the majority of the
> worlds internet service depend on, like the kernel, apache, proftpd, bind,
> qmail samba etc. They prefer to be members of the "OSS community" because
> of the rapid response that such a community effort can achieve.


But faithful Windows users don't have to worry about that - now Windows is
Trustworth Computing. Billy Gates said so, so it must be true. Windows is
secure now, and that is why it is worth paying all that money for it. In
fact , it is so good people don't need to use anything else and that's why
Microsoft deny us the inconvenience of having to make a choice.



Peter

 
Reply With Quote
 
Patrick Dunford
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2004
In article <DUled.13525$(E-Mail Removed)> in nz.comp on Sat, 23
Oct 2004 18:22:15 +1300, Max Burke <(E-Mail Removed)> says...
> Gordon scribbled:
>
> > There is a link off the mozilla.org page
> >
> > http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=5404
> >
> > Quote In part
> >
> > Mozilla and Other Browsers Vulnerable to Tabbed Browsing Spoofing
> > Attack Wednesday October 20th, 2004

>
> Do you know about this recently discovered 'hole' in Mozilla browsers
> running on many major versions of Linux?
> http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/11440
>
> Snip the usual crap....
>
> ALL OS'es have bugs; ALL OS'es require patching. All software running on
> ANY OS has bugs. It's NOT something that is unique to Microsoft and
> windows. Why do so many 'advocates' for *nix/OSS want this fact to be a
> '****ing contest' as some sort of 'advocacy' for *nix/OSS is for them to
> justify and explain.


Because you want this group to be PRo MS you start contests of your own.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Patrick Dunford
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2004
In article <odped.13548$(E-Mail Removed)> in nz.comp on Sat, 23
Oct 2004 22:09:05 +1300, Max Burke <(E-Mail Removed)> says...
> > thing scribbled:

>
> >>Max Burke wrote:

>
> >>> Gordon scribbled:

>
> >>> There is a link off the mozilla.org page
> >>> http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=5404
> >>> Quote In part
> >>> Mozilla and Other Browsers Vulnerable to Tabbed Browsing Spoofing
> >>> Attack Wednesday October 20th, 2004

>
> >> Do you know about this recently discovered 'hole' in Mozilla browsers
> >> running on many major versions of Linux?
> >> http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/11440

>
> > Well we could start off with,
> > Just about all the old versions, RH8.0, long superceeded....
> > RHAS2.1, while still supported/current old hat.
> > Mandrake 9.x, guess what we are on 10.0.
> > Its like saying win95/8 is vunerable....

>
> Are you REALLY claiming that every Mozilla user is using the latest version?
> REALLY?
>
> > Maybe we are getting frustrated with dealing with yet another zero MS
> > virus getting into our networks.

>
> If they ARE getting on to your network then I could suggest you're not doing
> your job very well....
>
> > Or getting up early to patch yet more
> > critical vunerabilities on MS boxes when we are nervious that applying
> > the patch is going to munt the boxes, necessitating a rebuild and tape
> > restore.

>
> Well if I was to follow the criteria you 'apparently chose to follow [above]
> then I wouldn't let any opensource OS or software on any of my computers.
>
> I subscribe to several security email lists, and have several Linux/OSS
> websites in my favourites list.
> Going by what I read there I get daily securtity email lists about Windows,
> *nix, etc and nearly those list far more *nix and OSS bugs than Microsoft
> bugs...
> Using *nix and OSS software requires almost DAILY updates and patches to fix
> these numerous bugs and fixes....


Crap. There are a much larger number of software packages running on Unix
/Linux, not everyone will have all of them.
>
> How do YOU keep up with them all??????


The OSS community invented some excellent tools like apt-update to keep
things going.

As it is I just did a scan of all our XP machines and found that despite
automatic updates being enabled, a number of machines on our network are
not fully up to date with Windows fixes and therefore potentially are
vulnerable.

now I am damned if I am going to have to make everyone a local
administrator because of MS's flawed automatic updates software or put in
a third party solution costing thousands of dollars.

> ALL OS'es have bugs; ALL OS'es require patching. All software running on
> ANY OS has bugs. It's NOT something that is unique to Microsoft and
> windows. Why do so many 'advocates' for *nix/OSS want this fact to be a
> '****ing contest' as some sort of 'advocacy' for *nix/OSS is for them to
> justify and explain. I personally would prefer that they/you NOT use
> nz.comp and nz.general to justify and explain why they/you need to behave
> this way as a *nix/OSS user/advocate......


Just stop cutting and pasting this into every message like some sort of
stuck record.

 
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
Great Lakes Ruby Bash -- Great Line-Up of Speakers -- RegistrationOpen (Hurry for Lunch!) Eric I. Ruby 0 10-05-2008 06:35 PM
"restoring" classes after changing stuff Marcelo Alvim Ruby 1 04-16-2007 10:23 PM
[Hear Ye Hear Ye] 0lde Timers - War3z Hounds - 0ne and All.... Hermes Digital Photography 0 03-26-2007 07:28 AM
Re: CANON - The Great Innovator (was: CANON - The Great Pretender) William Graham Digital Photography 2 08-23-2004 03:17 AM



Advertisments