Re: Open_Source
On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 08:58:24PM +0200, Polytropon wrote: > On Thu, 4 Jun 2009 20:31:46 +0200, cpghost wrote: > > BTW, since we're talking about vintage OSes: anyone knows of a > > BS2000 clone, emulator, ...? > > > > http://ts.fujitsu.com/products/bs2000/index.html > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BS2000 > > > > I'm especially interested in an emulation of the old terminal-based > > BS2000 before they introduced POSIX compat in 1992 (i.e. BS2000 as > > of between 1986 and 1992). > > > > For other emulators of old hardware, we have the great collecton of > > /usr/ports/emulators/simh plus images, but nothing BS2000-ish (yet). > > Or do we? > > Maybe you're interested in hercules, which provides emulation > of IBM's mainframe architecture that was the "parent" (with > OS/360 and OS/390) of Siemens' original BS2000. > > Vintage operating systems, let's see what I can remember... > SCP, DCP, MUTOS, SVP, VMX, PSU, WEGA, KAOS, OS/ES (once my > favourite)... I'm sure no one of you knows from mind what > I'm talking about. But don't mind, they don't exist anymore. :-) How about Scope2, Scope3, Nos, Nos/BE, Nos/VE, and the king of all, Scope/Hustler. Of course, they were not IBM mainframe OSen. They ran on the CDC 6000 and 170-180 mainframe systems. jerry > -- > Polytropon > >From Magdeburg, Germany > Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 > Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
so people do not be afraid to think outside the the box Finally, out of my experience with Linux and FreeBSD is that once a setup is working, it stays working, sometimes the initial setup takes longer , I ll be honest, there have been times when I spent days trying to get something working on Linux and FreeBSD, but once everything is configured right, it just works and works well. Thanks madunix On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 10:17 PM, Chris Rees wrote: > 2009/6/5 Chad Perrin : >> On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 09:50:24PM +0100, Chris Rees wrote: >>> 2009/6/3 Roland Smith : >>> > On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 09:35:31PM +0200, Polytropon wrote: >>> >> On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 13:46:15 -0500, "Gary Gatten" >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > Isn't there an "OpenVMS" somewhere? >>> > >>> > There is an open source clone in the works: http://www.freevms.net/ >>> > No idea of the state it is in. >>> > >>> > The OZONE OS [http://www.o3one.org/] uses a lot of VMS concepts. >>> >>> I just LOVE the webpage. The kind of one I'd make in my spare time... >> >> That's horrifying. Remind me to never visit one of your Webpages. >> >> Luckily, I can touch-type, because the temporary blindness induced by >> that site when the bright yellow irradiated my retinas still hasn't >> entirely faded. >> > > Hehe, mine is the opposite if you're interested; > > http://www.bayofrum.net > > Chris > > -- > A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. > Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? > A: Top-posting. > Q: What is the most annoying thing in a mailing list? > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 12:36:14PM -0500, Kirk Strauser wrote: > On Tuesday 02 June 2009 10:59:51 am Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > > I would add - with Open Source add it's far smaller (actually close to > > zero) probability that it doesn't do anything except it's supposed to do. > > > > I mean things like sending private data to someone else, scanning for > > other programs i have on disk, my addressbook etc. > > I agree completely. I'd never voluntarily trust my personal information to a > system that I (or other interested parties on my behalf) couldn't audit. I agree as well: Why encryption that doesn't trust the user isn't trustworthy http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=362 The article is particular to encryption, of course, but the same priniciples are easily generalized to other software types. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Edward Murphy, Jr. (Murphy's Law): "If there's more than one way to do a job and one of those ways will end in disaster, then someone will do it that way." pgpCbRn0Ge5za.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Open_Source
On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 02:33:28PM -0400, Thomas Dickey wrote: > On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 11:46:21AM -0600, Chad Perrin wrote: > > The links browser's interface is crap, as is that of every other text > > console based browser I've ever encountered. Moving around within a > > page and selecting a link are two tasks for which text console based > > browsers have not provided an even halfway decent interface. It seems as > > though Web browsers provide a rare case of an application type that is > > specifically suited primarily for a mouse-driven interface. > > lynx, (e)links(2) and w3m all support a mouse... . . . but not nearly as well as Firefox. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Scott McNealy: "Microsoft is now talking about the digital nervous system. I guess I would be nervous if my system was built on their technology too." pgpELQ6jtySHR.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Open_Source
On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 08:20:24PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >Slight tangent, and you may have mentioned it before: What window manager > >do you use? > > fvwm2, BUT not because i like it's tools and widgets, but because all of > them can be easily turned off :) > > My configuration strips everything possible including window titles and > borders, window moving and resizing are done with mouse+keyboard > combinations, menu shows on keypress and i use it's "virtual desktop" > function to switch between 24 of them using ALT-F* and CTRL-F*. ALT-X > start xterm full screen so xterm "window" looks like text console, with > the exception that i can run X program directly. > > I can post my config if you wish, it's <1700 bytes. No need. It sounds like my setup is even more minimal, and I'm happy with it. I was just curious. > > >>Unfortunately there are no well done WWW browsers for unix in the world. > >>links -g is an exceptions, but in the same time it's quite limited. > >>But have best fonts :) > > > >The links browser's interface is crap, as is that of every other text > > why? That was explained in the stuff you cut out. > > >console based browser I've ever encountered. Moving around within a > > moving works well. It works in a slow, tedious fashion, without much fine-grained control. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Jon Postel, RFC 761: "[B]e conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others." pgpCqdKPaoNAv.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Open_Source
On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 09:17:17PM +0100, Chris Rees wrote: > 2009/6/5 Chad Perrin : > > > > That's horrifying. Remind me to never visit one of your Webpages. > > > > Luckily, I can touch-type, because the temporary blindness induced by > > that site when the bright yellow irradiated my retinas still hasn't > > entirely faded. > > Hehe, mine is the opposite if you're interested; > > http://www.bayofrum.net Actually, that's much better -- though a lot of it seems broken. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Martin Luther: "Do not suppose that abuses are eliminated by destroying the object which is abused. Men can go wrong with wine and women. Shall we then prohibit and abolish women?" pgpQIIUqaPE08.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Open_Source
On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 08:22:48PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > > >That's horrifying. Remind me to never visit one of your Webpages. > > > >Luckily, I can touch-type, because the temporary blindness induced by > >that site when the bright yellow irradiated my retinas still hasn't > >entirely faded. > > > so use text mode links/elinks :) Maybe I will, if I ever visit that site again. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Richard Pattis: "If you cannot grok the overall structure of a program while taking a shower, e.g., with no external memory aids, you are not ready to code it." pgp71ZLRZb5qC.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Open_Source
2009/6/5 Chad Perrin : > On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 09:50:24PM +0100, Chris Rees wrote: >> 2009/6/3 Roland Smith : >> > On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 09:35:31PM +0200, Polytropon wrote: >> >> On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 13:46:15 -0500, "Gary Gatten" >> >> wrote: >> >> > Isn't there an "OpenVMS" somewhere? >> > >> > There is an open source clone in the works: http://www.freevms.net/ >> > No idea of the state it is in. >> > >> > The OZONE OS [http://www.o3one.org/] uses a lot of VMS concepts. >> >> I just LOVE the webpage. The kind of one I'd make in my spare time... > > That's horrifying. Remind me to never visit one of your Webpages. > > Luckily, I can touch-type, because the temporary blindness induced by > that site when the bright yellow irradiated my retinas still hasn't > entirely faded. > Hehe, mine is the opposite if you're interested; http://www.bayofrum.net Chris -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in a mailing list? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 11:46:21AM -0600, Chad Perrin wrote: > The links browser's interface is crap, as is that of every other text > console based browser I've ever encountered. Moving around within a > page and selecting a link are two tasks for which text console based > browsers have not provided an even halfway decent interface. It seems as > though Web browsers provide a rare case of an application type that is > specifically suited primarily for a mouse-driven interface. lynx, (e)links(2) and w3m all support a mouse... -- Thomas E. Dickey http://invisible-island.net ftp://invisible-island.net ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
The OZONE OS [http://www.o3one.org/] uses a lot of VMS concepts. I just LOVE the webpage. The kind of one I'd make in my spare time... That's horrifying. Remind me to never visit one of your Webpages. Luckily, I can touch-type, because the temporary blindness induced by that site when the bright yellow irradiated my retinas still hasn't entirely faded. so use text mode links/elinks :) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
A counter-example is VMS. It is a commercial product, but highly reliable and secure. It's also a much *simpler* piece of software than something like MS Windows, which makes it much easier to secure. you meant more logical? It's really hard to take care of software product that looks like random mess of different programs+patches without any higher idea - which micro-soft windows is. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
Slight tangent, and you may have mentioned it before: What window manager do you use? fvwm2, BUT not because i like it's tools and widgets, but because all of them can be easily turned off :) My configuration strips everything possible including window titles and borders, window moving and resizing are done with mouse+keyboard combinations, menu shows on keypress and i use it's "virtual desktop" function to switch between 24 of them using ALT-F* and CTRL-F*. ALT-X start xterm full screen so xterm "window" looks like text console, with the exception that i can run X program directly. I can post my config if you wish, it's <1700 bytes. Unfortunately there are no well done WWW browsers for unix in the world. links -g is an exceptions, but in the same time it's quite limited. But have best fonts :) The links browser's interface is crap, as is that of every other text why? console based browser I've ever encountered. Moving around within a moving works well. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 09:50:24PM +0100, Chris Rees wrote: > 2009/6/3 Roland Smith : > > On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 09:35:31PM +0200, Polytropon wrote: > >> On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 13:46:15 -0500, "Gary Gatten" > >> wrote: > >> > Isn't there an "OpenVMS" somewhere? > > > > There is an open source clone in the works: http://www.freevms.net/ > > No idea of the state it is in. > > > > The OZONE OS [http://www.o3one.org/] uses a lot of VMS concepts. > > I just LOVE the webpage. The kind of one I'd make in my spare time... That's horrifying. Remind me to never visit one of your Webpages. Luckily, I can touch-type, because the temporary blindness induced by that site when the bright yellow irradiated my retinas still hasn't entirely faded. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Georg Hackl: "American beer is the first successful attempt at diluting water." pgpUKvixmCKhy.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 04:06:18PM -0500, Gary Gatten wrote: > > Whatever happened to BeOS? Be went out of business. There have been a couple of clone projects to spring up since then. As mentioned, there's Haiku, the heir apparent to BeOS at this point. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Paul Graham: "SUVs are gross because they're the solution to a gross problem. (How to make minivans look more masculine.)" pgp9pceFjGCzQ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 06:50:39PM +0200, Polytropon wrote: > > A counter-example is VMS. It is a commercial product, but highly > reliable and secure. It's also a much *simpler* piece of software than something like MS Windows, which makes it much easier to secure. That's just one more thing Microsoft does wrong with software development, of course. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Dennis Miller: "Bill Gates is a monocle and a Persian Cat away from being the villain in a James Bond movie." pgphh77aCQmbh.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 08:32:38PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > Everyone can find them and fix, but at the same time everyone can find > them and use them. > > With closed source both are more difficult. That's not strictly true. In general, it's easier to discover vulnerabilities through reverse engineering techniques, fuzzing, et cetera, than by sifting through source code. The exceptions are cases where someone made a *really* bone-headed coding error. As a result, except when a programmer who adds code to the project is just completely incompetent (or has such an incompetent moment -- we all make mistakes), and it somehow passes review by other people on the development team (unlikely unless people aren't reviewing each others' code), it really isn't any easier to discover security vulnerabilities in open source software than in closed source software. The purely technical difference provided by open source software when it comes to vulnerability discovery and patching is that, once a vulnerability has been found, its origins in the source code can be tracked down and patched by *anyone*. In short, in technical terms, open source software makes it easier to *fix* vulnerabilities because it opens the pool of potential patch developers beyond the core team, but it doesn't really make it any easier to *discover* vulnerabilities in the general case. Then, of course, there are the social effects -- which encourage people who have a healthy interest in the software to contribute to its security and stability through a number of related social mechanisms. Overall, it's a tremendous win for open source software development. That doesn't mean that any given open source application will necessarily, inherently be more secure than any given closed source equivalent. It does, however, mean that if you're a betting man, your chances of winning a bet lie with the open source application, all else being equal. > > >In MICROS~1 land, you give yourself entirely into the hand of a > >corporation that is not interested in selling secure products, > > So this is not open/closed source problem, but micro-soft approach. > They just don't care about security. As they don't care about performance > and about bugs. But that's just micro-soft. Part of the problem of closed source software is that it provides a kind of "safe haven" for such unscrupulous software developers and vendors, where many such failings of secure development may go unnoticed due to the inability to determine exactly what's going on under the hood once you've noticed there's something wrong with the application. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Common Reformulation of Greenspun's Tenth Rule: Any sufficiently complicated non-Lisp program contains an ad hoc informally-specified bug-ridden slow implementation of half of Common Lisp. pgp8O7rhKtLb4.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Open_Source
On 6/5/09, Chad Perrin wrote: > On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 08:49:50AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> >> but it's at least much more difficult. And - my other rule fits very well >> here. Avoid OVERCOMPLEX programs. > > I tend to agree with this take on things, and I follow a similar > philosophy of software choice. > > Slight tangent, and you may have mentioned it before: What window manager > do you use? > > >> >> Unfortunately there are no well done WWW browsers for unix in the world. >> links -g is an exceptions, but in the same time it's quite limited. >> But have best fonts :) > > The links browser's interface is crap, as is that of every other text > console based browser I've ever encountered. Moving around within a > page and selecting a link are two tasks for which text console based > browsers have not provided an even halfway decent interface. It seems as > though Web browsers provide a rare case of an application type that is > specifically suited primarily for a mouse-driven interface. I use mouse with elinks & vim in console without problems. -- Paul ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 08:49:50AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > but it's at least much more difficult. And - my other rule fits very well > here. Avoid OVERCOMPLEX programs. I tend to agree with this take on things, and I follow a similar philosophy of software choice. Slight tangent, and you may have mentioned it before: What window manager do you use? > > Unfortunately there are no well done WWW browsers for unix in the world. > links -g is an exceptions, but in the same time it's quite limited. > But have best fonts :) The links browser's interface is crap, as is that of every other text console based browser I've ever encountered. Moving around within a page and selecting a link are two tasks for which text console based browsers have not provided an even halfway decent interface. It seems as though Web browsers provide a rare case of an application type that is specifically suited primarily for a mouse-driven interface. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Scott McNealy: "Microsoft is now talking about the digital nervous system. I guess I would be nervous if my system was built on their technology too." pgpaJY98wsm24.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 12:49:14AM +0100, Bruce Cran wrote: > On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 17:59:51 +0200 (CEST) > Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > > > I would add - with Open Source add it's far smaller (actually close > > to zero) probability that it doesn't do anything except it's supposed > > to do. > > > > I mean things like sending private data to someone else, scanning for > > other programs i have on disk, my addressbook etc. > > Given enough incentive, it unfortunately seems even open source > developers will resort to sneaky tactics: > http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/05/mozilla-ponders-policy-change-after-firefox-extension-battle.ars It's worth noting that this was discovered relatively quickly and became public knowledge. If it was closed source software, there's basically just be complaints about incompatibility and speculation without hard evidence. Yes, such perfidy *can* occur even in open source software, but it's easier to discover and, I believe, less likely to occur because of that ease of discovery. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Malaclypse the Younger: "'Tis an ill wind that blows no minds." pgpqCWujTQk7H.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Open_Source
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 07:59:55PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >>other programs i have on disk, my addressbook etc. > > > >YES!This is the biggest of the three things I have against MS > >and one of the main reasons for using FreeBSD and other Open Source > >software as much as possible. > > I think we all forget about third case, open and closed source being first > two. > > The case when you PAY for the product, you are not allowed to copy it to > others but you do get a source. > > It was common years ago with software like unix. And still exist just it's > not common. That's not really any different from closed source software in the end, because there's no guarantee that the officially "blessed" binary wasn't compiled from code modified to do things that the source provided to you doesn't do. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Marvin Minsky: ". . . anyone could learn Lisp in 1 day, except that if they already knew Fortran, it would take 3 days." pgpoF1oUsgR4P.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [off-list] Re: Open_Source
On Thursday 04 June 2009 22:05:55 Mel Flynn wrote: > On Wednesday 03 June 2009 19:26:00 Glen Barber wrote: > > Hi, Mel > > > > On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Mel Flynn > > > > wrote: > > > On Tuesday 02 June 2009 17:12:28 madunix wrote: > > >> 3- General experience with Open Source technology? > > > > > > Kinda getting fed up with the amount of trolling lately and loving > > > Sieve. > > > > This thread had me worried at first that it would turn into another > > wildfire... I'm happy it has not yet. > > Don't care about the tone. If people get angry on-topic, it's still > relevant (like the hald frustration venting, Xorg 7+, etc). People should > really learn to move off and semi-off broad-topic stuff to -chat or private > discussions and it shouldn't need moderation, just maturity. k, so reply-to-all is really reply to list. My apologies, should've stayed off list. -- Mel ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: [off-list] Re: Open_Source
On Wednesday 03 June 2009 19:26:00 Glen Barber wrote: > Hi, Mel > > On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Mel Flynn > > wrote: > > On Tuesday 02 June 2009 17:12:28 madunix wrote: > >> 3- General experience with Open Source technology? > > > > Kinda getting fed up with the amount of trolling lately and loving Sieve. > > This thread had me worried at first that it would turn into another > wildfire... I'm happy it has not yet. Don't care about the tone. If people get angry on-topic, it's still relevant (like the hald frustration venting, Xorg 7+, etc). People should really learn to move off and semi-off broad-topic stuff to -chat or private discussions and it shouldn't need moderation, just maturity. -- Mel ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009 20:31:46 +0200, cpghost wrote: > BTW, since we're talking about vintage OSes: anyone knows of a > BS2000 clone, emulator, ...? > > http://ts.fujitsu.com/products/bs2000/index.html > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BS2000 > > I'm especially interested in an emulation of the old terminal-based > BS2000 before they introduced POSIX compat in 1992 (i.e. BS2000 as > of between 1986 and 1992). > > For other emulators of old hardware, we have the great collecton of > /usr/ports/emulators/simh plus images, but nothing BS2000-ish (yet). > Or do we? Maybe you're interested in hercules, which provides emulation of IBM's mainframe architecture that was the "parent" (with OS/360 and OS/390) of Siemens' original BS2000. Vintage operating systems, let's see what I can remember... SCP, DCP, MUTOS, SVP, VMX, PSU, WEGA, KAOS, OS/ES (once my favourite)... I'm sure no one of you knows from mind what I'm talking about. But don't mind, they don't exist anymore. :-) -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 10:13:43PM +0200, Roland Smith wrote: > On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 09:35:31PM +0200, Polytropon wrote: > > On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 13:46:15 -0500, "Gary Gatten" > > wrote: > > > Isn't there an "OpenVMS" somewhere? > > There is an open source clone in the works: http://www.freevms.net/ > No idea of the state it is in. > > The OZONE OS [http://www.o3one.org/] uses a lot of VMS concepts. Thank you! A wounderful hint. BTW, since we're talking about vintage OSes: anyone knows of a BS2000 clone, emulator, ...? http://ts.fujitsu.com/products/bs2000/index.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BS2000 I'm especially interested in an emulation of the old terminal-based BS2000 before they introduced POSIX compat in 1992 (i.e. BS2000 as of between 1986 and 1992). For other emulators of old hardware, we have the great collecton of /usr/ports/emulators/simh plus images, but nothing BS2000-ish (yet). Or do we? TIA, -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 04:06:18PM -0500, Gary Gatten wrote: > Whatever happened to BeOS? http://www.haiku-os.org/ -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
2009/6/3 Polytropon : > On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 21:50:24 +0100, Chris Rees wrote: >> > The OZONE OS [http://www.o3one.org/] uses a lot of VMS concepts. >> >> I just LOVE the webpage. The kind of one I'd make in my spare time... > > Why? Because it's so L33T? :-) > > Yeah, and the apologies for inclusion of COMMENTS /* gasp */ -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in a mailing list? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Open_Source
-Original Message- From: Polytropon [mailto:free...@edvax.de] Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 3:56 PM To: utis...@gmail.com Cc: Chris Rees; Roland Smith; Gary Gatten; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Open_Source On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 21:50:24 +0100, Chris Rees wrote: > > The OZONE OS [http://www.o3one.org/] uses a lot of VMS concepts. > > I just LOVE the webpage. The kind of one I'd make in my spare time... Why? Because it's so L33T? :-) LMAO! Browsed the page a little and the OS sounds interesting though. Whatever happened to BeOS? "This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system." ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 21:50:24 +0100, Chris Rees wrote: > > The OZONE OS [http://www.o3one.org/] uses a lot of VMS concepts. > > I just LOVE the webpage. The kind of one I'd make in my spare time... Why? Because it's so L33T? :-) -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
The OZONE OS [http://www.o3one.org/] uses a lot of VMS concepts. I just LOVE the webpage. The kind of one I'd make in my spare time... i have no VMS knowledge so for now i just booted it on qemu and on computer directly. loads quickly, i logged in and for now don't know any more ;) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
2009/6/3 Roland Smith : > On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 09:35:31PM +0200, Polytropon wrote: >> On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 13:46:15 -0500, "Gary Gatten" wrote: >> > Isn't there an "OpenVMS" somewhere? > > There is an open source clone in the works: http://www.freevms.net/ > No idea of the state it is in. > > The OZONE OS [http://www.o3one.org/] uses a lot of VMS concepts. > I just LOVE the webpage. The kind of one I'd make in my spare time... Chris -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in a mailing list? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
There is an open source clone in the works: http://www.freevms.net/ No idea of the state it is in. basically doesn't work. The OZONE OS [http://www.o3one.org/] uses a lot of VMS concepts. downloading ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 09:35:31PM +0200, Polytropon wrote: > On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 13:46:15 -0500, "Gary Gatten" wrote: > > Isn't there an "OpenVMS" somewhere? There is an open source clone in the works: http://www.freevms.net/ No idea of the state it is in. The OZONE OS [http://www.o3one.org/] uses a lot of VMS concepts. Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgp0E5kBipbY1.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 21:08:50 +0200 (CEST), Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > Isn't there an "OpenVMS" somewhere? Is it true OSS? > > No. it's just product name, and is closed source. Yes. > They changed the name when IMHO it started to provide some api > that allow porting apps from other systems (like unix) easier. The "Open" indicates that it is conform to certain standards, like "it's open for interoperability" in terms of certain interfaces. -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 13:46:15 -0500, "Gary Gatten" wrote: > Isn't there an "OpenVMS" somewhere? VMS is called OpenVMS today, and owned by HP, if I remember correctly - I didn't check, sorry.ö > Is it true OSS? No. I mentioned VMS as an example that even closed source can be of high quality (as an exception to MICROS~1 stuff). > Also, how many people actually review source code AND have the skills to > find security related issues? Obviously enough of them - OpenSSH is an example. -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Open_Source
Yes, and that old urban legend, that Windows NT is "better" than VMS, so the initials are one higher in each position - at least in my alphabet: Actually - this man and few others from Digital made good job on kernel programming. Micro-soft f..ed everything else up. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Open_Source
Isn't there an "OpenVMS" somewhere? Is it true OSS? No. it's just product name, and is closed source. They changed the name when IMHO it started to provide some api that allow porting apps from other systems (like unix) easier. Also, how many people actually review source code AND have the skills to find security related issues? very few. and even less actually do this. some do it to actually make use of security holes, not fix it. Even more probable, they use it for some time, and then tell when they'll find another ;) I like "Open" for all the reasons most people do, but not convinced having access to source to review for security holes is a major "feature". I like source to fix things and add features / The only feature of open source is ... open source and no paying for program. Everything else - depends of actual software :) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Open_Source
Yes, and that old urban legend, that Windows NT is "better" than VMS, so the initials are one higher in each position - at least in my alphabet: VMS WNT Lots of interesting little things between VMS and WNT. G PS: Sorry again for top posting - I'll try harder! Is this appropriate topic for this list? ;-) -Original Message- From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of David Kelly Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 1:49 PM To: Wojciech Puchar Cc: cpghost; Polytropon; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Glen Barber Subject: Re: Open_Source On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 08:32:38PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > >A counter-example is VMS. It is a commercial product, but highly > >reliable and secure. > > At least is said too, i never used or even seen VMS. When Digital Equipment Corporation collapsed, the architect(s) of VMS went to Microsoft and were given NT to mold in their own likeness. This is where rings of security levels originated in modern Windows. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Cutler NT 3.5 and possibly 4.0 supported VMS-like versioned files as part of the filesystem. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dke...@hiwaay.net Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" "This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system." ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 08:32:38PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > >A counter-example is VMS. It is a commercial product, but highly > >reliable and secure. > > At least is said too, i never used or even seen VMS. When Digital Equipment Corporation collapsed, the architect(s) of VMS went to Microsoft and were given NT to mold in their own likeness. This is where rings of security levels originated in modern Windows. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Cutler NT 3.5 and possibly 4.0 supported VMS-like versioned files as part of the filesystem. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dke...@hiwaay.net Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Open_Source
Isn't there an "OpenVMS" somewhere? Is it true OSS? Also, how many people actually review source code AND have the skills to find security related issues? Seems mostly "black hats" would be interested in this as they have ulterior motives whereas "typical" users just want to use the software for what it was intended for. I like "Open" for all the reasons most people do, but not convinced having access to source to review for security holes is a major "feature". I like source to fix things and add features / functionality! Not that I can do it, but I can pay someone to WAY faster than getting M$ or others fix anything! -Original Message- From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Wojciech Puchar Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 1:33 PM To: Polytropon Cc: cpghost; Glen Barber; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Open_Source > > I'd like to add that IF security problems get discovered in OSS, > it's usually just a matter of few time that this problem gets > corrected. This is mostly because the public is able to look at that's true - i pointed it out at the beginning. It can be found easily that someone adds backdoor intentionally. But unintentional security holes are different thing. Everyone can find them and fix, but at the same time everyone can find them and use them. With closed source both are more difficult. > In MICROS~1 land, you give yourself entirely into the hand of a > corporation that is not interested in selling secure products, So this is not open/closed source problem, but micro-soft approach. They just don't care about security. As they don't care about performance and about bugs. But that's just micro-soft. > A counter-example is VMS. It is a commercial product, but highly > reliable and secure. At least is said too, i never used or even seen VMS. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" "This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system." ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
I'd like to add that IF security problems get discovered in OSS, it's usually just a matter of few time that this problem gets corrected. This is mostly because the public is able to look at that's true - i pointed it out at the beginning. It can be found easily that someone adds backdoor intentionally. But unintentional security holes are different thing. Everyone can find them and fix, but at the same time everyone can find them and use them. With closed source both are more difficult. In MICROS~1 land, you give yourself entirely into the hand of a corporation that is not interested in selling secure products, So this is not open/closed source problem, but micro-soft approach. They just don't care about security. As they don't care about performance and about bugs. But that's just micro-soft. A counter-example is VMS. It is a commercial product, but highly reliable and secure. At least is said too, i never used or even seen VMS. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Tuesday 02 June 2009 10:59:51 am Wojciech Puchar wrote: > I would add - with Open Source add it's far smaller (actually close to > zero) probability that it doesn't do anything except it's supposed to do. > > I mean things like sending private data to someone else, scanning for > other programs i have on disk, my addressbook etc. I agree completely. I'd never voluntarily trust my personal information to a system that I (or other interested parties on my behalf) couldn't audit. -- Kirk Strauser ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 18:21:28 +0200 (CEST), Wojciech Puchar wrote: > open source - just by being opensource - can't guarantee anything more > that availability of sources. > > It's important to stay away of all that hype that opensource programs are > just better. > > Many are, many not. I'd like to add that IF security problems get discovered in OSS, it's usually just a matter of few time that this problem gets corrected. This is mostly because the public is able to look at the source code, so many programmers with different approaches and opinions can evaluate a certain security concept, and harden it that way. There is no need even to rely on someone else to fix it - you can fix it yourself. In MICROS~1 land, you give yourself entirely into the hand of a corporation that is not interested in selling secure products, but ANY products, so you can't be sure that with the next release you can buy, a known security problem has been corrected - and if new problems are just delivered the same way. A counter-example is VMS. It is a commercial product, but highly reliable and secure. (Allthough, the sayings about the human being the weakest point in security considerations applies there, too.) -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
* /usr/ports/security/xspy but this do. so 2 X servers are compulsory... thanks ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Tuesday 02 June 2009 17:12:28 madunix wrote: > 3- General experience with Open Source technology? Kinda getting fed up with the amount of trolling lately and loving Sieve. -- Mel ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
Another perfect example that open source alone can't guarantee open source - just by being opensource - can't guarantee anything more that availability of sources. It's important to stay away of all that hype that opensource programs are just better. Many are, many not. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
* http://www.randombit.net/code/logger.c compiled this, did ./logger 0xed where 0xed was my other xterm then typed at least 10 lines at that xterm window got: -rw--- 1 wojtek wheel0 3 cze 18:23 logger-ed.log ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 04:45:42PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >> You mean Xorg can easily be hijack'ed that way? > > > > If you can connect to the X server, you can also attach any > > kind of monitoring software to it. Think vncserver and the like... > > vncserver creater new X server. Can't monitor yours unless you have > special module for X server installed and loaded (it is in ports) Okay, okay, how about this? * http://www.keyfrog.org/ * http://www.randombit.net/code/logger.c * /usr/ports/security/xspy * /usr/ports/security/uberkey Now back to work... -cpghost -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 09:53:07AM -0400, Glen Barber wrote: > My colleagues never understood (nor do they to this day) my paranoia > regarding security and untrusted code. I always point them in the > same direction: > > http://cm.bell-labs.com/who/ken/trust.html YES! An absolute classic. We're using it to teach sysadmin trainees about trust and security very early on in their careers. Always an excellent reminder. Another perfect example that open source alone can't guarantee security: I remember a CPAN perl module that used to warn you that you shouldn't blindly install software as root without checking it first. It didn't do anything harmful (really just a 'warn'), but potentially, it could have wreaked havoc... at least until someone spotted and reported it. I don't recall exactly what module it was or if it is still in CPAN now, but that was also a good reminder to be careful and use common sense. > Glen Barber > http://www.dev-urandom.com > http://www.linkedin.com/in/glenjbarber -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
Oh yes indeed: THAT's always bee the more serious threat, security-wise. A colleague of mine is a Windows administrator for a local company. I didn't think people actually did this until he told me a little People do even more things. In my public internet access network i found that 90% of people actually don't understand what is password for. They treat it as a form of torture from administrator ;) Yes - 90% ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
You mean Xorg can easily be hijack'ed that way? If you can connect to the X server, you can also attach any kind of monitoring software to it. Think vncserver and the like... vncserver creater new X server. Can't monitor yours unless you have special module for X server installed and loaded (it is in ports) Nothing forbids you to start 2 X servers and do console switching. That's what I do, and it's easy enough. and works. papers glued to monitor with passwords on them ;), or maybe a minute more to look at different places. Oh yes indeed: THAT's always bee the more serious threat, security-wise. so it's the first thing you should care about. Humans are ALWAYS weakest point of any security system. How many employees of your company ACTUALLY understand what are passwords for. Really? Yes, probably most of them don't, just know that it's something you have to type in ;) And don't forget about TEMPEST-like kinds of attack: you can't imagine just how much information you give away on the electromagnetic spectrum, even if you don't use WLANs... information that can be picked forget about it. it's too difficult compared to abuse of common human dumbness. Kevin Mitnick book is really worth of reading. i read polish translation. He NEVER cracked any system by using exploits. He just politely asked for a password. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 9:33 AM, cpghost wrote: >> There are MUCH simpler methods. Just pay few bucks to charwoman to look at >> papers glued to monitor with passwords on them ;), or maybe a minute more >> to look at different places. > > Oh yes indeed: THAT's always bee the more serious threat, > security-wise. > A colleague of mine is a Windows administrator for a local company. I didn't think people actually did this until he told me a little "prank" he pulls on those who do: When he finds a Post-It on their monitor with a password (or something resembling a password), he will write a different "word" on the Post-It and replace it with what was there (the real password) to teach them a lesson... > And don't forget about TEMPEST-like kinds of attack: you can't > imagine just how much information you give away on the electromagnetic > spectrum, even if you don't use WLANs... information that can be picked > up a few hundred meters away or even more outside of your security > perimeter and reconstructed. > > Talking about (justified?) paranoia: some 10 years ago, we had some > routing equipment in a server room that was NOT in the basement (i.e. > it had a window to the outside). Guess what? We had to put black > electrician's tape on the switches' LEDs, because it turned out that > those LEDs were blinking at the exact rate of the transmitted data, > bit-for-bit, and that anyone with a telescope and an optical sensor > could have picked that pattern up, and reconstructed the data stream. > > Scary, uh? My colleagues never understood (nor do they to this day) my paranoia regarding security and untrusted code. I always point them in the same direction: http://cm.bell-labs.com/who/ken/trust.html -- Glen Barber http://www.dev-urandom.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/glenjbarber ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 01:15:32PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > there, it's easy to hijack the X session (including keylogging etc.). > > You mean Xorg can easily be hijack'ed that way? If you can connect to the X server, you can also attach any kind of monitoring software to it. Think vncserver and the like... > > So you'll start another Xorg process as the other user, but are you > > Nothing forbids you to start 2 X servers and do console switching. That's what I do, and it's easy enough. > >> It's a matter of protecting yourself from "big brothers" that watch > >> others. > > > > Or from "little brothers" that explicitly target your infrastructure > > (think: industrial espionage etc.). Those attackers are much more > > worrying that your usual suspects, script kiddies et al., as contrary > > to the broad attackes of the latter, the former usually have more > > resources, including time, to conduct targeted penetration attempts > > into your secure environment. > > But they will not attack your company for sure. It always depends on the company... > There are MUCH simpler methods. Just pay few bucks to charwoman to look at > papers glued to monitor with passwords on them ;), or maybe a minute more > to look at different places. Oh yes indeed: THAT's always bee the more serious threat, security-wise. And don't forget about TEMPEST-like kinds of attack: you can't imagine just how much information you give away on the electromagnetic spectrum, even if you don't use WLANs... information that can be picked up a few hundred meters away or even more outside of your security perimeter and reconstructed. Talking about (justified?) paranoia: some 10 years ago, we had some routing equipment in a server room that was NOT in the basement (i.e. it had a window to the outside). Guess what? We had to put black electrician's tape on the switches' LEDs, because it turned out that those LEDs were blinking at the exact rate of the transmitted data, bit-for-bit, and that anyone with a telescope and an optical sensor could have picked that pattern up, and reconstructed the data stream. Scary, uh? > Are you sure the employees in your company doesn't do that? :) I can't, but that's the job of our security dept. They're conducting the background checks. If they still missed a human "troyan," well, that's life. ;-) -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
virtualbox) dedicated to this purpose and this purpose only. Exaggeration IMHO. just make sure your normal user has 700 permissions, create another and run browser from it. What about permissions in X? Even if you started the browser as another user, you'd still have to xhost + that user. And from i just copy .Xauthority file. there, it's easy to hijack the X session (including keylogging etc.). You mean Xorg can easily be hijack'ed that way? So you'll start another Xorg process as the other user, but are you Nothing forbids you to start 2 X servers and do console switching. That's just the tip of the iceberg. You never know what's still lurking out there on the host OS, and when you need strong security, a virtualized environment for untrusted processes as a minimum is a *must-have*. And even then, that is risky, if the emulator or paravirtualizer contains bugs and flaws. Even more important is to not use "standard" methods, as potential attcker can only quess what you do. modern day browsing even on fast machines. So it's not always practical to do so (though when security is paramount, browsing slowing may well be the price to pay). Separate computer is 1000 times simpler solution to your needs. That's right, and that's why non-Windows users are less exposed to the usual risks. But still, one has to be careful. agree. It's a matter of protecting yourself from "big brothers" that watch others. Or from "little brothers" that explicitly target your infrastructure (think: industrial espionage etc.). Those attackers are much more worrying that your usual suspects, script kiddies et al., as contrary to the broad attackes of the latter, the former usually have more resources, including time, to conduct targeted penetration attempts into your secure environment. But they will not attack your company for sure. There are MUCH simpler methods. Just pay few bucks to charwoman to look at papers glued to monitor with passwords on them ;), or maybe a minute more to look at different places. Are you sure the employees in your company doesn't do that? :) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 11:24:02AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > secondarily and only when absolutely necessary with the usual > > firefox+noscript+abp... both browsers running in a virtual box (qemu, > > virtualbox) dedicated to this purpose and this purpose only. > > Exaggeration IMHO. just make sure your normal user has 700 permissions, > create another and run browser from it. What about permissions in X? Even if you started the browser as another user, you'd still have to xhost + that user. And from there, it's easy to hijack the X session (including keylogging etc.). So you'll start another Xorg process as the other user, but are you sure both processes are totally isolated and can't communicate via unix-domain sockets etc? Checked all perms of all devices, all FIFOs etc? The point is: if you start *any* untrusted program on your host OS, there's a remote possibility that you've overlooked something (your example with 0700 permissions for home dirs is a good example, but there's a lot more), and that the process starts seeing stuff it isn't meant to see. And even chroot(2) isn't perfect. Remember: http://unixwiz.net/techtips/chroot-practices.html http://wiki.netbsd.se/How_to_break_out_of_a_chroot_environment That's just the tip of the iceberg. You never know what's still lurking out there on the host OS, and when you need strong security, a virtualized environment for untrusted processes as a minimum is a *must-have*. And even then, that is risky, if the emulator or paravirtualizer contains bugs and flaws. You can get a little bit more confidence with virtualizers if emulated CPU arch != host CPU arch (e.g. when emulating PPC, 68000 or even more exotic processors on x86), but that's dog slow for modern day browsing even on fast machines. So it's not always practical to do so (though when security is paramount, browsing slowing may well be the price to pay). And obviously, the emulator sill needs to resist especially crafted bytecode that may crash it in a very specific way (read: an exploit of an emulator's bug)! > > Of course, I'm taking more precautions, as running in a box may still > > not be 100% secure, if someone creative enough found a way to break > > out of the guest OS into the host OS; but everything else is just > > Nobody would write specially prepared webpage exactly for You to break ;) That's right, and that's why non-Windows users are less exposed to the usual risks. But still, one has to be careful. > It's a matter of protecting yourself from "big brothers" that watch > others. Or from "little brothers" that explicitly target your infrastructure (think: industrial espionage etc.). Those attackers are much more worrying that your usual suspects, script kiddies et al., as contrary to the broad attackes of the latter, the former usually have more resources, including time, to conduct targeted penetration attempts into your secure environment. You see, security is more than just protecting the normal desktop user from vanilla attacks. ;-) -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
Unfortunately there are no well done WWW browsers for unix in the world. links -g is an exceptions, but in the same time it's quite limited. But have best fonts :) You're right: browser code is overly complex, and a nightmare to audit properly for security purposes. links is not complex, and REALLY well done, unfortunately now nobody (or close to) works on it. If they would just implement CSS - it's enough! That's why when working in a sensitive environment, I browse the web primarily with elinks (with JavaScript disabled, of course), and right. but javascript in links is rather safe. Anyway - you may simply NOT LIKE someone else unknown programs to be run on your computer except when you want to. secondarily and only when absolutely necessary with the usual firefox+noscript+abp... both browsers running in a virtual box (qemu, virtualbox) dedicated to this purpose and this purpose only. Exaggeration IMHO. just make sure your normal user has 700 permissions, create another and run browser from it. Of course, I'm taking more precautions, as running in a box may still not be 100% secure, if someone creative enough found a way to break out of the guest OS into the host OS; but everything else is just Nobody would write specially prepared webpage exactly for You to break ;) It's a matter of protecting yourself from "big brothers" that watch others. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On 6/3/09, Wojciech Puchar wrote: >>> Unfortunately there are no well done WWW browsers for unix in the world. >>> links -g is an exceptions, but in the same time it's quite limited. >>> But have best fonts :) >> >> You're right: browser code is overly complex, and a nightmare to audit >> properly for security purposes. > > links is not complex, and REALLY well done, unfortunately now nobody (or > close to) works on it. If they would just implement CSS - it's enough! elinks have simplistic CSS support. >> That's why when working in a sensitive environment, I browse the web >> primarily with elinks (with JavaScript disabled, of course), and > > right. but javascript in links is rather safe. > > Anyway - you may simply NOT LIKE someone else unknown programs to be run > on your computer except when you want to. > >> secondarily and only when absolutely necessary with the usual >> firefox+noscript+abp... both browsers running in a virtual box (qemu, >> virtualbox) dedicated to this purpose and this purpose only. > > Exaggeration IMHO. just make sure your normal user has 700 permissions, > create another and run browser from it. > >> Of course, I'm taking more precautions, as running in a box may still >> not be 100% secure, if someone creative enough found a way to break >> out of the guest OS into the host OS; but everything else is just > > Nobody would write specially prepared webpage exactly for You to break ;) > > It's a matter of protecting yourself from "big brothers" that watch > others. > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > -- Paul ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 08:49:50AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >> > >> I mean things like sending private data to someone else, scanning for > >> other programs i have on disk, my addressbook etc. > > > > Given enough incentive, it unfortunately seems even open source > > developers will resort to sneaky tactics: > > http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/05/mozilla-ponders-policy-change-after-firefox-extension-battle.ars > > but it's at least much more difficult. And - my other rule fits very well > here. Avoid OVERCOMPLEX programs. > > Unfortunately there are no well done WWW browsers for unix in the world. > links -g is an exceptions, but in the same time it's quite limited. > But have best fonts :) You're right: browser code is overly complex, and a nightmare to audit properly for security purposes. That's why when working in a sensitive environment, I browse the web primarily with elinks (with JavaScript disabled, of course), and secondarily and only when absolutely necessary with the usual firefox+noscript+abp... both browsers running in a virtual box (qemu, virtualbox) dedicated to this purpose and this purpose only. Of course, I'm taking more precautions, as running in a box may still not be 100% secure, if someone creative enough found a way to break out of the guest OS into the host OS; but everything else is just irresponsible and way too risky, from a security point of view. Surely, not everyone has the same security requirements, and YMMV. ;-) -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
I want to know out of your experience people the following, 1- How open source served your businesses requirements? Better performance, stability & savings. Only saving is a feature of Open Source software. Others are features of just particular programs you use! 2- What kind of application that running on Open Source? I've seen many, mail servers, DNS servers, Cluster (HA), mysql, apache, tomact, snort, nessus, long list, you want it you get it. Most recent is a proxy server which is working great over FreeBSD and is far far better than the any other $MS based server. There are not only "open source products" and micro-soft in the world. Of course i agree about performance of FreeBSD based setups. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
I mean things like sending private data to someone else, scanning for other programs i have on disk, my addressbook etc. Given enough incentive, it unfortunately seems even open source developers will resort to sneaky tactics: http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/05/mozilla-ponders-policy-change-after-firefox-extension-battle.ars but it's at least much more difficult. And - my other rule fits very well here. Avoid OVERCOMPLEX programs. Unfortunately there are no well done WWW browsers for unix in the world. links -g is an exceptions, but in the same time it's quite limited. But have best fonts :) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 8:42 PM, madunix wrote: > Dear Experts, > > I want to know out of your experience people the following, > 1- How open source served your businesses requirements? Better performance, stability & savings. > 2- What kind of application that running on Open Source? I've seen many, mail servers, DNS servers, Cluster (HA), mysql, apache, tomact, snort, nessus, long list, you want it you get it. Most recent is a proxy server which is working great over FreeBSD and is far far better than the any other $MS based server. > 3- General experience with Open Source technology? Satisfaction. Easy support available, there are many great people who can always help you out, you don't have to sit and wait for the support from a bunch of people, where you really can't get what's happening, you don't have the code. Open source Do as it says. It's wonderful, and as good as it's user. > > Your input would be really appreciated. > > Thanks > madunix > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > Thanks & Regards Anuj Singh ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
Bruce Cran wrote: > On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 17:59:51 +0200 (CEST) > Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> I mean things like sending private data to someone else, scanning for >> other programs i have on disk, my addressbook etc. > > Given enough incentive, it unfortunately seems even open source > developers will resort to sneaky tactics: > http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/05/mozilla-ponders-policy-change-after-firefox-extension-battle.ars To the OPs original question(s), I stand by my beliefs in open source, in that: - FreeBSD and other OSS has been the fundamental foundation of our business - FreeBSD and other OSS can be trusted, so long as there are lists such as this where users can aggregate and discuss the software in a professional manner One more point: - if a mainstream OSS project decides to make a sudden architectural change within their development/licensing policy, users such as myself will find out about it on lists such as this, long before I'd hear about the same sort of tactic regarding commercial software Due to the latter point, if the rumblings of significant (unwanted) change are prevalent, it's easy enough to fork off, and continue to use the last favourable version available ;) Steve smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Open_Source
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 08:12, madunix wrote: > Dear Experts, That's an incorrect assumption! Heh. No expert me... > I want to know out of your experience people the following, > 1- How open source served your businesses requirements? Low cost implementations of useful tools for spam/virus mitigation and network monitoring, plus a network gateway. > 2- What kind of application that running on Open Source? Maia Mailguard (including postfix, mysql, clamav, spamassassin), ntop, netdisco, mrtg, nagios and a few others. Built a gateway/router with a whitebox, FreeBSD and 3 dual-port NICS to segregate our production network from our test/dev networks. Built a router with a Sangoma card and a white box for our DS3 and T1 connections. > 3- General experience with Open Source technology? In what sense do you ask? > Your input would be really appreciated. Turn about is fair play, methinks. For what purpose(s) are you asking the question? Kurt ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 17:59:51 +0200 (CEST) Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > I believe people can get more experience in general with open source > > technologies than they can with closed source. The reason is > > simple: I can look at the code. I can study it. I can see what > > ${APPLICATION} is doing, and how the developer designed it. This, > > in itself, makes me better at what I do, and better at > > troubleshooting my own code. > > I would add - with Open Source add it's far smaller (actually close > to zero) probability that it doesn't do anything except it's supposed > to do. > > I mean things like sending private data to someone else, scanning for > other programs i have on disk, my addressbook etc. Given enough incentive, it unfortunately seems even open source developers will resort to sneaky tactics: http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/05/mozilla-ponders-policy-change-after-firefox-extension-battle.ars -- Bruce Cran ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
2009/6/2 Wojciech Puchar : >> >> Multiple linux/bsd distributions: (RHEL, SuSE, FreeBSD + commercial >> UNIX as AIX) >> Monitoring Application:(Cacti, Nagios, MRTG) >> Backup utility:(rsync, tar, mondo) >> Content Management system:(Jommla, Durpal) >> Virtualization:(Wine) > > wine is virtualization? > You're right, wine is NOT virtualization (sic). It merely implements the 'Windows' API to make it available for 'Windows' programs. There is no 'translation' or 'emulation'. This is why Wine is an acronym: Wine Is Not an Emulator. Chris -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in a mailing list? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
Multiple linux/bsd distributions: (RHEL, SuSE, FreeBSD + commercial UNIX as AIX) Monitoring Application:(Cacti, Nagios, MRTG) Backup utility:(rsync, tar, mondo) Content Management system:(Jommla, Durpal) Virtualization:(Wine) wine is virtualization? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
in my case i have the following: Multiple linux/bsd distributions: (RHEL, SuSE, FreeBSD + commercial UNIX as AIX) Monitoring Application:(Cacti, Nagios, MRTG) Backup utility:(rsync, tar, mondo) Content Management system:(Jommla, Durpal) Virtualization:(Wine) Web Server:(Apache) Web filtering:(Squid, dansgaurdian + blacklist) Mail System:(Qmail, Postfix, sendmail) DB:(MySQL) Scripting:(Shell/bash,Perl,PHP) Servers: IBM SystemX and SystemP, DELL SAN storage: EMC, IBM DS8000 madunix On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Steve Bertrand wrote: > madunix wrote: >> Dear Experts, >> >> I want to know out of your experience people the following, > >> 1- How open source served your businesses requirements? > > Our business would likely not exist if it weren't for Open Source > (and/or free) software. Other than our Windows workstations, a few > Windows servers, Cisco IOS and a few other specifics here-and-there, we > are all open source. > > Everything is FreeBSD. > >> 2- What kind of application that running on Open Source? > > Pretty much everything: > > - routers (Quagga BGP, OSPF etc) > - RADIUS > - web servers > - email servers > - database servers > - backup (AMANDA) > - infrastructure config management (RANCID) > - performance graphing (MRTG) > - performance testing (iperf etc) > - troubleshooting (tcpdump, wireshark etc) > - traffic engineering (ipfw etc) > - communications (firefox, thunderbird) > - and hundreds more > >> 3- General experience with Open Source technology? > > Very, very good. I find though that the more you give, the more you get out. > > In our environment, things are very dynamic, and very custom. We can > change software live-time to make it do what we need it to do. Being > able to look into the source code makes it very easy to write custom > applications that 'hook in' to existing ones. > > Steve > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
There will always be both of them. And that's OK as long as you can choose. Yes, I agree. I use Windows as my workstation, because there are some specific applications that require Windows to run. You don't have to explain - you use because you want to :) that's all. Being able to modify software to fit our ever changing environment is key, and so is knowing that (for the most part), the ability is there to communicate directly with the developers. Another side-effect of using open source software is that over time, you learn how things *really* work. For instance, if you have garnered up But this is not because of open source. Some closed source too - allows you or even motivates to understand things. And some open source apps - try to prevent you from understanding anything. It's depend of certain product, NOT only the fact of source availability. Speaking of logging, open source applications do log...properly. Depends of program. There are as much open source crap as closed source. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
But i'm not agains micro-soft. If someone want to pay and be controlled - his problem. Today micro-soft doesn't even hide with this!! So it's clear - you pay big brother and he does well the job he's paid for! I am, -- on my machines. but you want to be the owner of your computer. But most people - as they acts show - prefer to be owned. And micro-soft (and others) just give what they want. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> The only rationale I've heard for closed source is that somebody >> could >> steal the idea. > > There will always be both of them. And that's OK as long as you can choose. Yes, I agree. I use Windows as my workstation, because there are some specific applications that require Windows to run. The rest of the applications on my workstation are open source win32 apps. Visio is the main one. I've been told that there are alternatives to Visio that will run on *nix. However, the alternatives either: - take more time (time * salary) to get configured than the cost of the software - take more time (time * salary) to familiarize myself with the alternative than the cost of the software - don't provide certain functionality that I need ISPs are very dynamic in nature. From my experience in both the enterprise and ISP environments, enterprise need to stay focused on stability, whereas the ISP needs to be more adaptive to new technologies. In the enterprise, I've found that it is by far more cost effective to run almost exclusively on commercial software. The number of IT staff is kept to a minimum, and let's face it, it's easier/cheaper to find an employee with a Windows background than it is someone who has extensive real-world open source operations experience. Being able to modify software to fit our ever changing environment is key, and so is knowing that (for the most part), the ability is there to communicate directly with the developers. Another side-effect of using open source software is that over time, you learn how things *really* work. For instance, if you have garnered up experience running an MTA on FreeBSD (and understand the logs etc), you will undoubtedly be able to fudge your way through troubleshooting an Exchange server, it will just take a bit of time to know where to click. The reverse is not really true (from my experience). Speaking of logging, open source applications do log...properly. Steve smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Open_Source
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 07:44:46PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >>I mean things like sending private data to someone else, scanning for > >>other programs i have on disk, my addressbook etc. > > > >YES!This is the biggest of the three things I have against MS > >and one of the main reasons for using FreeBSD and other Open Source > >software as much as possible. > > But i'm not agains micro-soft. If someone want to pay and be > controlled - his problem. > > Today micro-soft doesn't even hide with this!! So it's clear - you pay big > brother and he does well the job he's paid for! I am, -- on my machines. What someone else does is there problem unless it spreads to my stuff. > >(ps. The other two are the quality of MS systems and MS business practices) > > I didn't mean microsoft but any commercial software. I know, but I picked that as my example. jerry > > Actually i just switched from opera to firefox for similar reasons. > > I DO NOT say that opera doing such things, but i'm not sure it does not. > > Every minute or so when i use opera is starts lots of disk I/O and slows > down. It do so no matter if i'm loading some pages or do just nothing. > > It wasn't happening with older versions, but with that > opera-9.64.20090302 > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
other programs i have on disk, my addressbook etc. YES!This is the biggest of the three things I have against MS and one of the main reasons for using FreeBSD and other Open Source software as much as possible. I think we all forget about third case, open and closed source being first two. The case when you PAY for the product, you are not allowed to copy it to others but you do get a source. It was common years ago with software like unix. And still exist just it's not common. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
The only rationale I've heard for closed source is that somebody could steal the idea. There will always be both of them. And that's OK as long as you can choose. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
I mean things like sending private data to someone else, scanning for other programs i have on disk, my addressbook etc. YES!This is the biggest of the three things I have against MS and one of the main reasons for using FreeBSD and other Open Source software as much as possible. But i'm not agains micro-soft. If someone want to pay and be controlled - his problem. Today micro-soft doesn't even hide with this!! So it's clear - you pay big brother and he does well the job he's paid for! (ps. The other two are the quality of MS systems and MS business practices) I didn't mean microsoft but any commercial software. Actually i just switched from opera to firefox for similar reasons. I DO NOT say that opera doing such things, but i'm not sure it does not. Every minute or so when i use opera is starts lots of disk I/O and slows down. It do so no matter if i'm loading some pages or do just nothing. It wasn't happening with older versions, but with that opera-9.64.20090302 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 12:18:09PM -0400, Steve Bertrand wrote: > madunix wrote: > > Dear Experts, > > > > I want to know out of your experience people the following, > > > 1- How open source served your businesses requirements? > > Our business would likely not exist if it weren't for Open Source > (and/or free) software. Other than our Windows workstations, a few > Windows servers, Cisco IOS and a few other specifics here-and-there, we > are all open source. > > Everything is FreeBSD. > > > 2- What kind of application that running on Open Source? > > Pretty much everything: > > - routers (Quagga BGP, OSPF etc) > - RADIUS > - web servers > - email servers > - database servers > - backup (AMANDA) > - infrastructure config management (RANCID) > - performance graphing (MRTG) > - performance testing (iperf etc) > - troubleshooting (tcpdump, wireshark etc) > - traffic engineering (ipfw etc) > - communications (firefox, thunderbird) > - and hundreds more > > > 3- General experience with Open Source technology? > > Very, very good. I find though that the more you give, the more you get out. > > In our environment, things are very dynamic, and very custom. We can > change software live-time to make it do what we need it to do. Being > able to look into the source code makes it very easy to write custom > applications that 'hook in' to existing ones. > > Steve Yes! Like Glen (prev post), I occassionally look at the src to see how something was coded; this gave my own coding abilities a boost and didn't hurt the original code a whit. Interesting how muvh we can learn from one another, isn't it? The only rationale I've heard for closed source is that somebody could steal the idea. Or get a jump on creating a clone. My experience has been that EVERY bit of commercial code could be open; people would still want/need/demand/pay-for *support*. gary -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org For FBSD list: http://transfinite.thought.org/slicejourney.php ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 05:59:51PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >I believe people can get more experience in general with open source > >technologies than they can with closed source. The reason is simple: > >I can look at the code. I can study it. I can see what > >${APPLICATION} is doing, and how the developer designed it. This, in > >itself, makes me better at what I do, and better at troubleshooting my > >own code. > > I would add - with Open Source add it's far smaller (actually close to > zero) probability that it doesn't do anything except it's supposed to do. > > I mean things like sending private data to someone else, scanning for > other programs i have on disk, my addressbook etc. YES!This is the biggest of the three things I have against MS and one of the main reasons for using FreeBSD and other Open Source software as much as possible. jerry (ps. The other two are the quality of MS systems and MS business practices) > > If anyone would do this, soon someone else would see it because source > code is available for everybody. > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
madunix wrote: > Dear Experts, > > I want to know out of your experience people the following, > 1- How open source served your businesses requirements? Our business would likely not exist if it weren't for Open Source (and/or free) software. Other than our Windows workstations, a few Windows servers, Cisco IOS and a few other specifics here-and-there, we are all open source. Everything is FreeBSD. > 2- What kind of application that running on Open Source? Pretty much everything: - routers (Quagga BGP, OSPF etc) - RADIUS - web servers - email servers - database servers - backup (AMANDA) - infrastructure config management (RANCID) - performance graphing (MRTG) - performance testing (iperf etc) - troubleshooting (tcpdump, wireshark etc) - traffic engineering (ipfw etc) - communications (firefox, thunderbird) - and hundreds more > 3- General experience with Open Source technology? Very, very good. I find though that the more you give, the more you get out. In our environment, things are very dynamic, and very custom. We can change software live-time to make it do what we need it to do. Being able to look into the source code makes it very easy to write custom applications that 'hook in' to existing ones. Steve smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Open_Source
I believe people can get more experience in general with open source technologies than they can with closed source. The reason is simple: I can look at the code. I can study it. I can see what ${APPLICATION} is doing, and how the developer designed it. This, in itself, makes me better at what I do, and better at troubleshooting my own code. I would add - with Open Source add it's far smaller (actually close to zero) probability that it doesn't do anything except it's supposed to do. I mean things like sending private data to someone else, scanning for other programs i have on disk, my addressbook etc. If anyone would do this, soon someone else would see it because source code is available for everybody. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
I want to know out of your experience people the following, 1- How open source served your businesses requirements? excellent. 2- What kind of application that running on Open Source? All i needed - do you want a list ? 3- General experience with Open Source technology? what exactly you want to know? Your input would be really appreciated. Thanks madunix ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Open_Source
Hi, On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 11:12 AM, madunix wrote: > Dear Experts, > > I want to know out of your experience people the following, > 1- How open source served your businesses requirements? Allowing extensibility. Generally, if something needs to be changed, it _can_ be changed, and usually with minimal overhead. > 2- What kind of application that running on Open Source? This is a very vague question. Do you mean desktop or server applications? (I use FreeBSD for both purposes... Hopefully that answers your question. :) ) > 3- General experience with Open Source technology? > I believe people can get more experience in general with open source technologies than they can with closed source. The reason is simple: I can look at the code. I can study it. I can see what ${APPLICATION} is doing, and how the developer designed it. This, in itself, makes me better at what I do, and better at troubleshooting my own code. On the same note, free software enables me to get experience with more applications without burning through my wallet. :) > Your input would be really appreciated. > > Thanks > madunix -- Glen Barber http://www.dev-urandom.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/glenjbarber ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"