Rival - Vista security - GONE - Linux

This is a discussion on Rival - Vista security - GONE - Linux ; Phil Da Lick! wrote: > Little Mad Dog wrote: >> Phil Da Lick! wrote: >>> Little Mad Dog wrote: >>>> Rex Ballard wrote: >>>>> On Aug 12, 1:17 am, Little Mad Dog wrote: >>>>>> Rex Ballard wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> It's ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 16 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 320

Thread: Rival - Vista security - GONE

  1. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    > Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >> Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >>> Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >>>> Rex Ballard wrote:
    >>>>> On Aug 12, 1:17 am, Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >>>>>> Rex Ballard wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> It's a Chicken Little post and Chicken Little hype.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Not exactly. It's actually a well known exploit that shows that
    >>>>> "nothing has changed". If anything Microsoft has opened MORE back
    >>>>> doors since 1997.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Any O/S can be exploited in the wrong hands. I don't care if it's
    >>>> MS, Linux, Apple or whatever. None of them are bullet proof or
    >>>> ironclad, and if you think one of them is, then your fooling yourself.
    >>>
    >>> Well, there's three main positions:
    >>>
    >>> Bulletproof: A theoretical position, as you state no OS is
    >>> "hackerproof".
    >>>
    >>> Ironclad: The best case to hope for. Wearing as much armour as
    >>> possible: user has sufficient rights to operate his system and no more.

    >>
    >> No, users must be educated like I was educated on how to protect the O/S.
    >>
    >>> OS designed with proper user rights from the get go. In this scenario
    >>> you still won't withstand hardened attack but the average script
    >>> kiddy or botnet will bounce right off. If a part of the suit or
    >>> armour gets too weak, replace it. This would be Linux and most of the
    >>> other 'Nix's.

    >>
    >> I don't have a problem using the MS or the Linux platform, but neither
    >> one of them are all that. You can believe that about .Nix, but I have
    >> been doing this for too long to know better.
    >>>
    >>> Standing bent over, facing away with your pants around your ankles
    >>> shouting "Hello sailor!". No thought to user privs from the word go.
    >>> Allow apps to run with admin privs. Spend 10 years turning the target
    >>> this way and that attempting to deny entry whilst allowing the user
    >>> to "click here to face the original way", blithely ignoring the fact
    >>> that he *still* ends up stood there with his arse in the air waiting
    >>> for attack. Hope that you or someone can build a fence high enough to
    >>> obscure his butthole, again ignoring the army ants that come along
    >>> and tear the fences down faster than you can build them. This would
    >>> be the windopes approach.

    >>
    >> I don't respect talk like this. Therefore, I must toss your opinion in
    >> the trash can, because you don't seem sane here.
    >>>
    >>> The sooner M$ retire windopes and build a proper OS with proper privs
    >>> from the word go the better. The keeping compatibility approach that
    >>> they've been on for the last 15 years just aint gonna cut it no more.
    >>> Time to start with a blank slate.

    >>
    >> The blank slate started with .Net. They will get around to the O/S.
    >> The desktop O/S(s) are going to the waste side anyway, including the
    >> *.nic's.

    >
    > The blank slate needs to be the OS. The dev model that sits on top of it
    > is not the issue. If the OS were properly modelled from a security pov
    > there would be a lot less malware around. So what if a few apps break? A
    > few rewrites and months later and new proper versions and the internet
    > would be a much safer place.


    The O/S doesn't access the Internet. Programs that run with the O/S
    access the Internet, such as Web server software, software that uses
    the Web server, a browser access the Internet, software that uses the
    browser access the Internet, by means of using protocols such as HTTP,
    FTP and other protocols, using ports TCP or UDP.

    The O/S only provides the means for those solutions to run. Technology
    must be put into place from a language standpoint to recognize hostile
    or malicious intent by the program solution using the language. It's
    part of the equation that must be addressed, which is staring to happen
    with managed code .Net solutions.

    Managed code meaning the .Net solution that is managed is using the CLI
    Common Language Infrastructure that interprets the code from a language
    like C# or VB.Net and converts it over to machine language code for a
    given cpu and interrogates the code's intent and stop the code if need
    be from executing.

    Of course it's not bullet proof but it's a start. It's a program that
    attacks or tries to compromise.

    Language control of the kind that I am talking about must be addressed
    along with the O/S being addressed and both must be implemented
    together. MS started addressing the issue with .Net when MS had the
    fallout over Java with Sun Micro Systems about Java and came out with
    ..Net.

  2. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    Linonut wrote:
    > * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >
    >> You're silly. You have made silly comments here. And the O/S(s) are
    >> swiss cheese in the wrong hands. And that's a fact. It doesn't matter
    >> what O/S it is either.

    >
    > Idiot.
    >


    Pfft, that's what I think about you.

  3. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    Linonut wrote:
    > * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >
    >> Obviously, that's not the case. Obviously, any O/S in the wrong hands is
    >> suspect. I don't care how you view it. Those are the facts.

    >
    > Bill Gates spent much of his working life getting Windows into "the
    > wrong hands", then.


    Pfft, that's what I think about you and your comments.

  4. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    On 2008-08-12, Little Mad Dog wrote:
    > Linonut wrote:
    >> * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>
    >>> Obviously, that's not the case. Obviously, any O/S in the wrong hands is
    >>> suspect. I don't care how you view it. Those are the facts.

    >>
    >> Bill Gates spent much of his working life getting Windows into "the
    >> wrong hands", then.

    >
    > Pfft, that's what I think about you and your comments.


    Any engineer has to live in the real world. They can't just ingore
    parts of it that doesn't suit whatever non-technical agenda they might
    have. Real engineers get sued, prosecuted and lose their licensing over
    stupidity like that.

    --
    Apple: because TRANS.TBL is an mp3 file. It really is! |||
    / | \

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  5. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    chrisv wrote:
    > Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >
    >> chrisv wrote:
    >>> In his "wrong hands", huh? I guess you believe that the vast majority
    >>> of Windows users are computer-saavy, are well-aware of the security
    >>> issues, and so are able to "stay clean", huh?

    >> Obviously, that's not the case. Obviously, any O/S in the wrong hands is
    >> suspect. I don't care how you view it. Those are the facts.

    >
    > Obviously, some O/S are more susceptable to attack than others. I
    > don't care how you view it. Those are the facts.


    Not if one knows what he or see is doing to protect it.

    >
    >> But for me,
    >> yes I am savvy enough to keep any computer O/S clean, because I have
    >> taken the time and/or will take the time, and I have the expertise to do so.

    >
    > You are not the issue. The issue is the tragically poor Windows
    > security model, which renders it, really, unfit for the masses that it
    > purports to serve.


    But that's not going to stop people from using the platform, and you
    know what that say about opinions. They are a dime a dozen and everyone
    has got one.

    > I acknowledge that it works sort of OK for
    > experts, or in corporate environments where experts protect the users.


    That same information is in books and out there on Google if one is
    aware of it. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out and
    educate him or herself, like the example in the link. I knew nothing
    about protecting IIS, the file system, the registry, user accounts and
    the O/S, which the link below doesn't cover those aspects. But from a
    home user standpoint, it gives them a foundation to start from to become
    educated on how to protect the O/S.

    http://labmice.techtarget.com/articl...ychecklist.htm
    ..
    >
    >> And this coming from the infamous chirsv that has trolled the Internet
    >>from one side to the other. I have seen you in action over the years
    >> harassing people and then doing your *plonk* and run routine that you
    >> are so infamous for that you been doing for years. You are a super
    >> troll bar none. I am surprised you didn't issue your usual plonk and run.

    >
    > If someone doesn't like my postings, they are free to filter them.
    > Unlike you, I don't nym-shift, so it need only be done once.


    For what, 99.9% of the time, you're not talking about anything anyway,
    other than, harassing people.

    >
    >>> Idiot.

    >> You take a hard look at yourself in the mirror, because the times I have
    >> seen you, you are far from being perfect.

    >
    > I'm about as "perfect" as Linux is. 8)


    You think to highly of yourself, please man, you left Earth long ago.
    >
    >> I really think that you have
    >> some serious mental issues you need to seek professional help on.
    >>
    >> You're out here on the Internet way too much to be sane.

    >
    > LOL You got me there! 8)
    >


    Need I say more?

  6. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    On 2008-08-12, Little Mad Dog wrote:
    > Linonut wrote:
    >> * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>
    >>> You're silly. You have made silly comments here. And the O/S(s) are
    >>> swiss cheese in the wrong hands. And that's a fact. It doesn't matter
    >>> what O/S it is either.

    >>
    >> Idiot.
    >>

    >
    > Pfft, that's what I think about you.


    You're just trying to perpetrate the big lie that you can't do better
    than the crap that Microsoft has come up with so why bother trying...

    It's a weak excuse for pisspoor engineering.

    Anyone that tries the same stupid things on Linux or MacOS should be
    promptly beaten and then beaten again if they try to proceed anyway.

    --
    Apple: because TRANS.TBL is an mp3 file. It really is! |||
    / | \

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  7. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > Linonut wrote:
    >> * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>
    >>> Obviously, that's not the case. Obviously, any O/S in the wrong hands is
    >>> suspect. I don't care how you view it. Those are the facts.

    >>
    >> Bill Gates spent much of his working life getting Windows into "the
    >> wrong hands", then.

    >
    > Pfft, that's what I think about you and your comments.


    Fair enough, Little MD-20/20.

    --
    Linux poses a real challenge for those with a taste for late-night
    hacking (and/or conversations with God).
    -- Matt Welsh

  8. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > Linonut wrote:
    >> * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>
    >>> You're silly. You have made silly comments here. And the O/S(s) are
    >>> swiss cheese in the wrong hands. And that's a fact. It doesn't matter
    >>> what O/S it is either.

    >>
    >> Idiot.

    >
    > Pfft, that's what I think about you.


    Aw, ya sound like my daughter!

    --
    Will the third world war keep "Bosom Buddies" off the air?

  9. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    Linonut wrote:
    > * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >
    >> Linonut wrote:
    >>> * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>>
    >>>> You're silly. You have made silly comments here. And the O/S(s) are
    >>>> swiss cheese in the wrong hands. And that's a fact. It doesn't matter
    >>>> what O/S it is either.
    >>> Idiot.

    >> Pfft, that's what I think about you.

    >
    > Aw, ya sound like my daughter!


    I don't know what to make of you, other than, you're nut.

  10. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    Linonut wrote:
    > * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >
    >> Linonut wrote:
    >>> * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>>
    >>>> Obviously, that's not the case. Obviously, any O/S in the wrong hands is
    >>>> suspect. I don't care how you view it. Those are the facts.
    >>> Bill Gates spent much of his working life getting Windows into "the
    >>> wrong hands", then.

    >> Pfft, that's what I think about you and your comments.

    >
    > Fair enough, Little MD-20/20.
    >


    All you have amounted to here is a dumb home user that's all you are about.

  11. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    JEDIDIAH wrote:
    > On 2008-08-12, Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >> Linonut wrote:
    >>> * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>>
    >>>> Obviously, that's not the case. Obviously, any O/S in the wrong hands is
    >>>> suspect. I don't care how you view it. Those are the facts.
    >>> Bill Gates spent much of his working life getting Windows into "the
    >>> wrong hands", then.

    >> Pfft, that's what I think about you and your comments.

    >
    > Any engineer has to live in the real world. They can't just ingore
    > parts of it that doesn't suit whatever non-technical agenda they might
    > have. Real engineers get sued, prosecuted and lose their licensing over
    > stupidity like that.
    >


    I am trying to figure out what you are talking about. What are you
    talking about? I don't respect the person or anything he has to say.

  12. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    JEDIDIAH wrote:
    > On 2008-08-12, Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >> Linonut wrote:
    >>> * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>>
    >>>> You're silly. You have made silly comments here. And the O/S(s) are
    >>>> swiss cheese in the wrong hands. And that's a fact. It doesn't matter
    >>>> what O/S it is either.
    >>> Idiot.
    >>>

    >> Pfft, that's what I think about you.

    >
    > You're just trying to perpetrate the big lie that you can't do better
    > than the crap that Microsoft has come up with so why bother trying...


    I don't like the person nor do I respect the person.
    >
    > It's a weak excuse for pisspoor engineering.


    Please man, you are totally off in left field here.

    >
    > Anyone that tries the same stupid things on Linux or MacOS should be
    > promptly beaten and then beaten again if they try to proceed anyway.
    >


    What is wrong with you? What is your point here? What are you talking
    about? You make no sense here in the context of the post I made to
    someone I absolutely do not respect.

  13. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    Little Mad Dog wrote:

    > Not if one knows what he or see is doing to protect it.


    Most don't, idiot, which makes false and dishonest your claim that
    Windows security problems are "chicken little hype".


  14. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    chrisv wrote:
    > Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >
    >> Not if one knows what he or see is doing to protect it.

    >
    > Most don't, idiot, which makes false and dishonest your claim that
    > Windows security problems are "chicken little hype".
    >


    It is as far as I am concerned, because I don't have any problems
    implementing security in any O/S I may use.

    If one can't drive, then one gets out from behind the wheel. It's that
    simple. If you can't do it, then don't use it.

  15. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    chrisv wrote:
    > Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >
    >> Not if one knows what he or see is doing to protect it.

    >
    > Most don't, idiot, which makes false and dishonest your claim that
    > Windows security problems are "chicken little hype".
    >


    And you'll notice something else here in our conversation, I didn't call
    you any names, which I think is out of your ability to do that, chrisv,
    and is the status quo behavior in this NG. I didn't even bash Linux.
    There is something wrong with the mindset in this NG.

  16. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    Little Mad Dog wrote:

    >chrisv wrote:
    >>
    >> If someone doesn't like my postings, they are free to filter them.
    >> Unlike you, I don't nym-shift, so it need only be done once.

    >
    >For what, 99.9% of the time, you're not talking about anything anyway,
    >other than, harassing people.


    Filter my posts if you don't like them, dimwit!

    It really takes chutzpa for some troll, who routinely nym-shifts to
    avoid recognition and to evade kill-filters, to complain about the
    quality of my posts!

    Enough troll feeding. *plonk*


  17. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    chrisv wrote:
    > Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >
    >> chrisv wrote:
    >>> If someone doesn't like my postings, they are free to filter them.
    >>> Unlike you, I don't nym-shift, so it need only be done once.

    >> For what, 99.9% of the time, you're not talking about anything anyway,
    >> other than, harassing people.

    >
    > Filter my posts if you don't like them, dimwit!


    I have paid no attention to you. You got into may face. I didn't seek
    you out nor have I ever sought you out to hold a conversion with you.
    You don't exist. I see you and I don't have to open one of your posts,
    because I have seen you in action a few times to know that you're up to
    no good, whatever you're doing.
    >
    > It really takes chutzpa for some troll, who routinely nym-shifts to
    > avoid recognition and to evade kill-filters, to complain about the
    > quality of my posts!


    Pot calling the kettle black.
    >
    > Enough troll feeding. *plonk*



    Oh, there is that infamous *plonk* and run routine.

    bye

  18. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > Linonut wrote:
    >> * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>
    >>> Linonut wrote:
    >>>> * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Obviously, that's not the case. Obviously, any O/S in the wrong hands is
    >>>>> suspect. I don't care how you view it. Those are the facts.
    >>>> Bill Gates spent much of his working life getting Windows into "the
    >>>> wrong hands", then.
    >>> Pfft, that's what I think about you and your comments.

    >>
    >> Fair enough, Little MD-20/20.

    >
    > All you have amounted to here is a dumb home user that's all you are about.


    Fair enough, you cute puppy you.

    --
    I thought YOU silenced the guard!

  19. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > Linonut wrote:
    >> * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>
    >>> Linonut wrote:
    >>>> * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>>>
    >>>>> You're silly. You have made silly comments here. And the O/S(s) are
    >>>>> swiss cheese in the wrong hands. And that's a fact. It doesn't matter
    >>>>> what O/S it is either.
    >>>> Idiot.
    >>> Pfft, that's what I think about you.

    >>
    >> Aw, ya sound like my daughter!

    >
    > I don't know what to make of you, other than, you're nut.


    Fair enough. Here's a biscuit.

    --
    Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right.
    -- Salvor Hardin, "Foundation"

  20. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > JEDIDIAH wrote:
    >> On 2008-08-12, Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >>> Linonut wrote:
    >>>> * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>>>
    >>>>> You're silly. You have made silly comments here. And the O/S(s) are
    >>>>> swiss cheese in the wrong hands. And that's a fact. It doesn't matter
    >>>>> what O/S it is either.
    >>>> Idiot.
    >>>>
    >>> Pfft, that's what I think about you.

    >>
    >> You're just trying to perpetrate the big lie that you can't do better
    >> than the crap that Microsoft has come up with so why bother trying...

    >
    > I don't like the person nor do I respect the person.
    >>
    >> It's a weak excuse for pisspoor engineering.

    >
    > Please man, you are totally off in left field here.
    >
    >> Anyone that tries the same stupid things on Linux or MacOS should be
    >> promptly beaten and then beaten again if they try to proceed anyway.

    >
    > What is wrong with you? What is your point here? What are you talking
    > about? You make no sense here in the context of the post I made to
    > someone I absolutely do not respect.


    Fair enough, Little Mad Dog.

    Try this Milk Bone.

    --
    Q: How many Bell Labs Vice Presidents does it take to change a light bulb?
    A: That's proprietary information. Answer available from AT&T on payment
    of license fee (binary only).

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 16 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 ... LastLast