Restarting old computer?

[danjmilos]

debt boy,

Because it was fun!!! And still is!!!

I have never had problems with my WINDOWS XP SP3. It takes very little time on my part to keep my computer running at a nice peak. My friends major problem was he knows very little about comp's and his wife isn't to much ahead of him with some pointers they could could have a good time like you and I do on the internet. It takes reading a few forums like this one and others on what not to do. If they don't get a moniter and keyboard soon the free AV I installed AVAST will lapse. I keep bugging him to get moving it's not nice having hardware sitting around doing nothing but it is his to do nothing with. I got SP2 installed and wanted to finish there updates but oh well.

Nice chatting, bed time I have a roof to finish tomorrow.

Dan

[wdhpr]

Because it was fun!!! And still is!!!

I agree danjmilos

Some of the projects I do is just for fun, be it for my yard, garage, house, car and oh yea my beloved computer. I consider my computer a hobby, probably because I don't have to use one continuously for work.

PS: I enjoyed reading your post on reviving the computer. Ever consider writing as a hobby?

Cheers
Wdhpr

[debtboy]

Ah yes,
It's good to have a debate in the "Debating Chamber".

Originally Posted by Mike Connor

The operating system is actually rarely the cause of most problems, the operator is.

I have to disagree here, an insecure operating system is usually
the cause of most problems.
There is nothing wrong with clicking links on the internet or in email,
links and associations were designed just for clicking. I know I've heard
"Just point and click" somewhere before.
You can't blame the operator.

Originally Posted by Mike Connor

lt doesn't make any difference which system they happen to be using.

Yes it does, it makes a big difference!!

For example...
Lets say I'm checking my local email on WindowsXP
and a super simple executable script (worm) shows up as an attachment
(click_me.bat) it contains the following command:
ipconfig /release
I click and internet goes away bummer, lucky the writer
wasn't too malicious, he could have used FDisk

Now that same script (re-written to target Linux) shows up
in my local email as an attachment.
(click_me.sh) it contains the following commands:
#!/bin/bash
ifconfig eth0 down
I click and might get an option to save or nothing.
Lets say it saves, but it doesn't run, why not? rw-r--r--
I click it after it's saved and still doesn't run, why not? rw-r--r--
Because it's not executable and the .sh extension
has no effect it could be .exe, .bat it doesn't matter
Unix like systems don't issue execute permissions based
on extensions.

How do you get this script to run?
The root or owner of the file has to change the permissions
to make it executable rwxr-xr-x
Now finally, I can execute this malicous script...
Not exactly, I can run the script now, but the script running
under my permissions can't execute the ifconfig command
only root can.
Looks like my internet is safe even after running that virus.

Originally Posted by Mike Connor

A single click on a lot of things, on any system, can ( and often does) render the system inoperable, beyond the capability of the operator to repair it. That's why there are trained technicians and programmers available in many places, because they can repair it.

So no, a single click by a user on a Linux system rarely if ever renders
the system inoperable. Why don't you ask the average trained technician
to help with your Linux problem and take notice of the look you'll get (Ha! Ha!)

Originally Posted by Mike Connor

"Bashing" various systems, does not make any other system better, nor is it likely to make anybody change to Linux from Windows.

I wouldn't call it bashing as bash is one of many Linux shells.
I'm just trying to point out that Linux is inheriently more secure
than Windows due to user rights/permissions and default masking.
The 2 main factors making Windows insecure are associations based
on extensions and elevated user rights, nearly to the root level.
(I believe Vista tries to remedy the elevated user permissions), but
too little too late, Vista has other issues.

Mike it's a good debate, but as usual a Windows user looks at Linux
with a Windows mind-frame. Linux is structured very differently and I
sometimes attack and provoke to bring out some solid facts.

Did you know that the ext3 and ext4 filesystems (Linux native)
will probably never have to be defragged, or there is no real
need to reboot your Linux system after it's properly set up.

Just some fun facts, good debate

[debtboy]

Yes danjmilos and wdhpr,
I agree, working on computers
can sometimes be fun, but
debating is sometimes fun also.

[Mike Connor]

Originally Posted by debtboy

AWhy don't you ask the average trained technician
to help with your Linux problem and take notice of the look you'll get (Ha! Ha!)

Unix and other systems existed long before Windows, and there are still a large number of trained technicians for such systems. I don't know how old you are, but judging by what you write, I was servicing and programming Unix and other systems on a whole range of computers before you were born, and long before PC's even existed.

http://www.levenez.com/unix/

Trained technicians are also trained not to waste time, and if they are unable to solve a problem quickly, to escalate it properly.

I can't ask any "average" technicians such questions, all mine were well above average, that's why they worked for me in the first place.

There are fundamental differences in the approach to problems by various users and technicians.

Professional technicians are trained to save time and money. For what a top technician costs for two hours work, you can buy a new top class PC.

Some users are interested in the "nuts and bolts" of their machines, the vast majority are not. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with any of these approaches, but they result in different viewpoints.

Clicking on an e-mail, or indeed anything else, when you don't know what it is, is operator error. It has nothing at all to do with the security of the operating system.

In professional networks, people are often simply prevented from clicking on various things. The administrator ( who knows what he is doing),sets things up so that they can not do so. There are also a large number of other security protocols used in professional networks.

On PC's, especially those with direct internet connections, there are no such safeguards.

That does not mean that a particular system is unsafe, ( although it is often interpreted in such a fashion), merely that those using the system don't know how to use it properly.

Anybody with sufficient know-how can shut down any system in existence with a single click. Lots of people with very little know-how also do it constantly.

Linux is inherently "safer" on PC's for a variety of reasons, not the least of which because it is simply not worth a hacker`s trouble to target it. It also has a great many inherent disadvantages. Even after all this time the hardware and periphery support is miserable, again because it is not worthwhile for software/hardware suppliers to target it either.

QUOTE"Mike it's a good debate, but as usual a Windows user looks at Linux
with a Windows mind-frame. Linux is structured very differently and I
sometimes attack and provoke to bring out some solid facts.UNQUOTE

I use lots of systems, some you probably have never even heard of, I don't have a particular "mind-frame" in regard to any specific system.

"Attacking and provoking", however one does it, merely causes aggression, and rarely brings out any facts, "solid" or otherwise.

[debtboy]

Originally Posted by Mike Connor

Unix and other systems existed long before Windows, and there are still a large number of trained technicians for such systems. I don't know how old you are, but judging by what you write, I was servicing and programming Unix and other systems on a whole range of computers before you were born, and long before PC's even existed.

Mike,
This thread started with a user attempting to fix a Windows computer
riddled with trojans, viruses, spyware, etc...

I merely took the opportunity to expose a few holes in the Windows armor
while plugging Linux at the same time.

You in turn (with all your unix experience) stated various falsehoods
(in my opinion) so I gave a solid example which was contrary to your
statements.

As for the long winded technician job description below...???

Originally Posted by Mike Connor

http://www.levenez.com/unix/

Trained technicians are also trained not to waste time, and if they are unable to solve a problem quickly, to escalate it properly.

I can't ask any "average" technicians such questions, all mine were well above average, that's why they worked for me in the first place.

There are fundamental differences in the approach to problems by various users and technicians.

Professional technicians are trained to save time and money. For what a top technician costs for two hours work, you can buy a new top class PC.

Some users are interested in the "nuts and bolts" of their machines, the vast majority are not. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with any of these approaches, but they result in different viewpoints.

Clicking on an e-mail, or indeed anything else, when you don't know what it is, is operator error. It has nothing at all to do with the security of the operating system.

Well, in my example, the Windows operator,
lost his or her internet connection
while the Linux operator was unaffected.

Originally Posted by Mike Connor

In professional networks, people are often simply prevented from clicking on various things. The administrator ( who knows what he is doing),sets things up so that they can not do so. There are also a large number of other security protocols used in professional networks.

On PC's, especially those with direct internet connections, there are no such safeguards.

That does not mean that a particular system is unsafe, ( although it is often interpreted in such a fashion), merely that those using the system don't know how to use it properly.

Not exactly sure what your getting at.

Originally Posted by Mike Connor

Anybody with sufficient know-how can shut down any system in existence with a single click.

It's called an on/off switch

Originally Posted by Mike Connor

Linux is inherently "safer" on PC's for a variety of reasons, not the least of which because it is simply not worth a hacker`s trouble to target it.

This is a long running myth, but your already to worked up
so there is no point in debunking it right now, maybe later.

Originally Posted by Mike Connor

I use lots of systems, some you probably have never even heard of, I don't have a particular "mind-frame" in regard to any specific system.

"Attacking and provoking", however one does it, merely causes aggression, and rarely brings out any facts, "solid" or otherwise.

I do believe there were some solid facts brought out, but I
also see how upset/defensive you've become, so
I sincerely apologize for attacking or provoking this debate.

As for the age and experience comments...
I do have experience on many different systems old and new,
but I just don't make a point of mentioning it and your probably
underestimating my age considerably.

Good Debate,
Thanks Mike

[Mike Connor]

Indeed, basically all this is off topic.

I am not in the least "worked-up", "defensive" or "upset" about anything at all. I invariably try to view things as objectively as possible, it is one of the things I am trained to do, and an essential skill for an engineer.

It is invariably a mistake to jump to conclusions about somebody based on your own reactions.

Whatever, have a nice day.................

[MidnightCowboy]

Excellent comment, same with computer security, biggest problem user input.

[debtboy]

Originally Posted by MIDNIGHTCOWBOY

Excellent comment, same with computer security, biggest problem user input.

Then, I guess we need a free anti-user_input program (Ha! Ha! Ha!)

It's sad when the average computer user is responsible for understanding
the high tech, ever changing world of computer security and malware protection.

Would you blame the innocent users (or user input) in this case
http://boards.cexx.org/index.php?topic=17209.45

This may not be the norm, but it's one of many examples of
innocent users, by no fault of their own, becoming compromised.


I believe that Microsoft is aware of vulnerabilities due to system design
so they will be releasing their own anti-malware product soon.
http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazin...ware-software/


Interesting article, which seems similar to this thread:
http://www.bsdnexus.com/drupal/node/36

I'm starting to like this "Debating Chamber"

[Mike Connor]

Originally Posted by debtboy

Then, I guess we need a free anti-user_input program (Ha! Ha! Ha!)

All professional systems have these, they are known as administrators. Their main function is to prevent their users crashing the system by clicking on or entering things they shouldn't, and also trying to repair or rescue systems that have been damaged or compromised by users. A secondary function is installing and maintaining the system itself.

The main deterrent in such systems is also that if a user continues doing silly things he can be dismissed. There are rumours of agitated sysadmins using other deterrents, like axes, and the warning "If you do it again I'll chop your fingers off".