Pardon me? What planet are you (Brad) and Benjamin from? Surely not this
one. You invalidate your own arguments before you've finished making them.
I'll accept what happened to me is all my fault. You say however that Linux is
OK for amateurs. However you expect that amateur to be able to properly secure
their machine, after all they're responsible for it. So, do you really think
an amateur is somehow going to create and install a firewall script, fix the
Bind exploits, watch the security advisories and know which services they can
or can't shut down? Come on, get real. Face it 99.9% of the users out there
have neither the time nor expertise for this. You've totally shaken my belief
in Linux and I've changed my opinion. Windows may be a "brick" but at least
it's not a tool to wreak havoc on the web, exactly as configured out of the
box. Perhaps a warning on the Linux box, "Warning, Linux is an extremely
powerful operating system and only experts, trained in Internet security and
certified in Linux should consider using this Operating System in anything but
a standalone environment".
And back to the cracker's please. Seems they're getting a free ride. No one
wants any policing of the Internet but it's already happening, I just got
kicked off didn't I. Is it such a stretch to suggest that we actually go after
the bad guys? I certainly don't encourage anything drastic. However, instead
of just kicking someone off the Internet for Port Scanning why don't you then
run a trace on that machine and try to capture the offending behavior. Your
suggestion that the "users" will do it is absurd beyond comprehension. Go
ahead, ask your mom to find the cracker that's attacking her computer. How
about your 12 year old child? I know, I know, don't let them use Linux. Give
them a Windows "Brick" instead. Linux is reserved for that .1% suitably
trained and with sufficient time to baby-sit their machines, certainly not for
the masses. Certainly puts a major crimp in my Linux Evangelism.
You should really take a sniff at what you're shoveling because it sure doesn't
smell very good, nor bode well for Linux. If I were to believe what you
suggest I would very strongly suggest it be pulled from every shelf and book
out there because I absolutely guarantee you that most of the people installing
Linux from these sources are doing it for the first time, that they're NOT
proficient in Linux or Security and that they are connecting it to the
Internet. As such they are NOT securing their machines but are "drunk driving"
and remember their "ignorance is no defense". Proof positive we need a
warning label.
Now, darn it, I want my Internet back. My kids are hounding me constantly and
it's making me cranky. Can't you tell :-)
Brad Maxwell wrote:
> >police to monitor our highways. The choice is anarchy. The only people
> >who can truly provide the required "policing" are the service
> >providers. The fact in the matter in this whole thing is the only
> >person unaffected is the cracker. It's likely they've cracked other M1
> >boxes as well. I'm not complaining about being temporarily kicked off.
> >I am complaining about it's "permanent" nature and about the complete
> >lack of anyone trying to fix the real problem... the crackers.
>
> Sorry I can't let this go.
>
> Your use of the highways is a
> priveledge - lisence - contract for service
> contigent upon your compliance with a
> EULA - set of laws
> which can be revoked permanently by the
> service provider - government
> when they detect that you have violated the
> EULA - law
>
> for example port scanning or drunk driving
> in both cases ignorance is no defense
>
> if the
> service provider - government
> determines that there have been others involved
> cracker - bartender - automaker
> punisment is distributed accordingly
>
> Or another analogy
> if you own a piece of equipment which can be used for harm
> Gun - Sophisticated Computer / OS combination (this removes
> windows from the discussion)
> and you don't adequately protect the society from damage done by
> another with your equipment
> the kid stole my gun - the craker hijacked my system
> you will be held responsible along with the idividual (if they can
> be found)
> further if you hide the responsible individual
> "wasn't my kid - don't know who" - "I deleted the logs"
> You may be held liable for abetting as well as enablement
>
> Napster has never been accused of stealing music only enabling
> others to and look at what it got them.
>
> Yes you are partially a victim. In recognition of that fact M1 gave you to
> opportunity to solve the delima without any lasting repercussions
>
> Napster was given the opportunity to change their business structure
>
> You didn't take advantage of that opportunity.
>
> Napster is trying to
>
> You are out of business
>
> Napster may yet stay alive
>
> How far removed from this planet and do you actually live?
>
> **********************************************************
> To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
> *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
> unsubscribe gnhlug
> **********************************************************
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
