Re: Compromised Linux box stories (Re: [SLUG] upgrading complicated installs)
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 10:47 AM, Rick Welykochy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote: On Mon, 2 Jun 2008 at 14:59, Jason Ball [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not wishing to start an OS war, but I rarely if ever have seen a BSD or Sun box compromised. Is this due to sheer numbers of Linux and Doze? More than likely. I've seen a range of plausible reasons and hard statistics to back up Linux supporters' assertions that the frequency of compromises on Windows systems is due to far more than just its sheer install base. I'd hate to see Linux users start to solely use the 'market share' argument against other, less used, operating systems. As pointed out previously, one contributing factor to x86 Windows and Linux architectures being popular targets is that there is significant payback in writing attack software for platforms that are ubiquitous. The rarer the system, the less likely there is blackhat experience to crack it. Market share is a factor. But as we all know, a house of cards built of shakey foundations is another factor. BSD and Sun zealots do claim that their software systems are much more robust/stable than Linux and Windows. I cannot respond to that claim. Regarding your sig: Your toaster doesn't crash. Your television doesn't crash. Why should your computer? http://www.linux.org.au/linux The answer should be obvious. A dedicated computer running an appliance runs heavily tested software dedicated to one purpose and a well-known hardware set. A general purpose computer running any variety of software you install along with a conglomerate of possibly never before tried hardware suffers the combinatorial explosion of interactions and complexity that a toaster never experiences. The devil is in the detail of general-purpose vs purpose-built. That said, I know a great knife-related toaster bug. For some reason instead of fixing it the designers just added warnings to the user manual saying don't use this combination of inputs. Sam -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] web/domain redirection ?
On Jan 25, 2008 7:21 PM, Voytek Eymont [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: how can I divert web/domain to a foreign server that I have no control over ? I have a domain.org.au, the web server pages for the domain now needs to be served from anotherdomain.com on a remote server I've tried to set a CNAME www CNAME anotherdomain.com but that serves blank page, I suspect, the page request arrives as 'domain.org.au' and the remote server expects 'anotherdomain.com' ? There are actually a number of ways to do this, but it depends what behaviour you want from the client and how much access you have to the server. An HTTP or Meta redirect will change the URL shown in the address bar, so the user will know they have been moved to anotherdomain.com. If you use an invisible frame, users will see the original URL at all times (even if they navigate to a different location, which may be undesirable). Using a more complex method (mod_proxy), you can make the remote site transparently appear to be on the local site. All those methods except for mod_proxy are explained in more detail here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/URL_redirection#Techniques the relevant section of mod_proxy's documentation: http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.0/mod/mod_proxy.html#proxypassreverse Sam -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] Mass converting Gigabites of wma to mp3
On Jan 22, 2008 12:59 AM, Daryl Thompson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi
I have 287Gb of my music still on an external HD in Windows Wma format
in multiply directory's under a top directory of wma
i wish to mass convert these files and do a little tidy up on them
I have 3 main goals to achaive
1. Converting the wma to mp3
2. Removing the wma after converting
3. removing the old desktop.ini files in these directory
There's an awfully nifty utility called find that you can use
whenever you need to interact with directory trees recursively.
I'll give you an example for your first problem, and the rest should
seem fairly obvious from there:
find -type f -iname '*.wma' -exec wma2mp3 {} \;
Which means find anything in this directory tree that's a file whose
name matches '*.wma' and then execute 'wma2mp3 that file'.
Remember, with great power comes great responsibility! Before you run
any find commands you should first make sure you're doing what you
think you're doing. Especially don't trust find commands given to you
by some random guy from the internet.
Changing -exec blah to -exec echo blah will show you what command
you're about to run on lots and lots of files. You may even want to
copy-paste one of the lines of echo output to your terminal to dry-run
it on just one file.
Don't be too proud to double-check - I'm sure everyone here has a
great story or two about wiping their home directory.
Oh, and as always, man find will bring great enlightenment and happiness.
Sam
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] linux filesystem
On Jan 2, 2008 2:35 PM, Alex Samad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi I am going to be working on some large files (~5G) and I was in the process of making some room with lvm, did the formatting as ext3 and thought maybe there is a better fs for the job. These are video file that I will be working on. Just wondering what other people used for large size file partitions, should I just stick to ext3 ? I've been reading a little about XFS lately. I haven't used it yet, but it certainly seems to have some quite nice features and is geared for large files and filesystems. Sam -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] Tuesday afternoon shell command optimisation party!
On Dec 18, 2007 5:21 PM, Peter Hardy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 2007-12-18 at 16:09 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote: Here's a starting point. What's a more optimal way to perform this task? :-) sed 's#[^,]*##g' input.txt | tr -d '\n' | wc -m Tuesday afternoon shell optimisation party! How do you want it optimised? Well, for readability, speed and code size this handy BF program is easily the winner: ,[[-+++][--]+[[-]-][-+],]. Keep in mind it's also optimised for usability, so the output is the ascii value of the number rather than the number itself. It only handles up to 255 commas (unless you have a unicode BF interpreter.) HTH, Sam -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
