*OT* LINUX FINALLY joins the ranks of "REAL" Operating Systems... *OT*

... How?

They've been hacked. Not only HACKED, but PWNED. And for ALMOST A YEAR, with NO-ONE THE WISER.

Linux infection proves Windows malware monopoly is over; Gentoo ships backdoor? [updated] | ZDNet

Now that LINUX has finally proven itself to be worth hacking, maybe we can finally get around to producing a malware-scanner for it. :wink:

mnem
Maybe we can get the good pr0n too...

<End Transmission>​

 

Well now we know what Bill and Company have been up to lately!

 

Perhaps they were the ones doing the hacking....

 

Pride goeth before a great fall, gentlemen.

It was the LINUX development community's arrogant assumption that their repositories were safe that made this possible; and it was the LINUX user community's arrogant assumption that they were safe simply because they were using LINUX that has prevented any meaningful development of anti-malware products for the platform.

This was inevitable; it is in the nature of hackers to hack, just as it is in the nature of Microsoft to bully their way into every venue they have an interest in. Microsoft doesn't need to be involved; in fact, odds are they wouldn't even bother. They're much too busy not supporting Windows XP and Vista while marketing Win7 to other nations who don't want it.

I've had this conversation as a what-if a dozen times on /. and now it's finally a reality. Now what is important is what we as part of the geek community do about it.

mnem
H@C|<3

 

mnemeth: I have to respectfully disagree. Antivirus/Maleware programs exist for Linux, people just usually don't use them.

Haveing said that, Linux is still more secure then Mac OS, but they are both vulnerable to viruses and maleware (invited in by user error).

What happened here is a problem that an open source OS will have. If the source for Windows and Mac OS were publicly available the same type of exploit could be put into their sources.

- Dominik

 

"maleware" I guess if that's your thing... Not that there's anything wrong with that....

 

Well said Mnem. Arrogant is right.
I grew up with the DOS prompt and the command line. I suffered through years of crappy Windows releases. I bought my share of Linux bibles. Every year or two I would try to setup an old desktop with some variant of Linux but that was it. It would just sit there while I did my work/play on a Windows machine. I even have Ubuntu on an old netbook. I just not sure I get it. I love to tinker but I just don't have the time to try to make Linux work. Maybe 25 years ago but not now.

Mike

 

And therein lies the rub. We all know about Clamwin (it's what I use on my Windows-based TB's). Well Clamwin comes about because of the very successful and perhaps not so well known (except in the *nix system admin community) Clam-AV on which Clamwin is based.

The commercial anti-virus applications have vested-interests in making you think that security is much more of a problem than it really is. Basically, it comes down to common-sense and the hype you see in the pro-MS media about how 'bad' it is only comes about because the average user is too blind to basic common-sense precautions when using a system connected to a wider open network (ie. DARPA's little bay-bee that we call the Internet).

*nix has been security-aware for the past 30 years ever since it was first created.

Commercial *nix's like SunOS (the core OS inside Solaris - now unfortunately pwned by Oracle), etc. have always included a lot of key security protections which are an integral part of the operating system from the kernel level up.

With Windows, security has not been, until about Win Xp, a serious enough commercial consideration for MS to make it something that the core OS should support. That's changing as we know with Win Vista, 7, etc, but it's still an afterthought. Basically 'security' is divided into two sides with Windows - 'social' controls and 'digital rights' controls. That is what people think about with 'security'. It's not correct of course but that's what the general perception of 'security' is to the average Joe user of Megasloth Windoze.

Craig.

 

You may take any exceptions you like to my statement; I still stand by them.

I said MEANINGFUL development; and it's true. You point to ONE product, which is a pain in the @ss to install, to use, and to update, just like the OS itself. MS and OSX each have dozens of useful variants to choose from, all of which are easy enough for a senator to use.

You point to the inherent "security" of the *NIX design. I say that very security is why ordinary people hate it...

You can build your security one of two ways:

You close EVERYTHING OFF, deny ALL ACCESS, until you see what people scream about loudest and allow access. This is the *NIX model. It ASSUMES and even DEMANDS a level of technical prowess that most people are NOT interested in developing; and like it or not, they SHOULDN'T NEED TO; they expect to press a button and their car stays locked; why should they need to perform the software equivalent of wrapping a chain around their computer every time they turn it on or off.

The other solution is to open almost everything up and close the holes as they emerge; this is the MS/Apple method. It has the advantage of working pretty much out of the box; you as a user don't need to build the engine yourself out of parts shipped in 16 boxes like you do with *NIX to ensure you don't have any bogus parts.

As for "Security not being a commercial consideration at MS".. OF COURSE IT IS!!! They make megabux off of the aftermarket security solutions in support and collaborative works they can later steal to their own benefit... why would they willingly spend money to develop it and give it away for free when they can steal it over years, all the while making money off the support angle in the meantime?

I'm old enough now that I don't care anymore... I'm sick and tired of stroking and massaging my Model T of a computer to keep it from leaving me stranded on the side of the road; I'm ready for my "Turn the key & go" Fuel Injected '57 Chevy... they'll be here in the next few years. I'll also soon be ready for the "Buy it and forget about it for 200,000 miles" Toyota Corolla computers that should be here in the next 10-15 years...

I'm tired of the constant argument over whose OS is best; it's ALL BS anyways. The OS should NOT and WILL NOT be a separate commodity to market and sell independently of the computer; eventually everyone will realize that it is PART OF THE COMPUTER just like the engine or transmission.

You don't go to the dealership expecting to have to put the engine in your car yourself, or the security system, or the entertainment center.

Why do we take this for granted with computers?

mnem
Every OS sucks.

 

I'll drink to that!!!
Hell, I've used my ipod touch more on the web lately than my Laptop...
Get me a virus on that...

 

talking about arrogance:

New iPhone Virus Found

 

This is NOTHING compared to the V!rus that comes shipped with the iPwn... AT&T cellular service.

mnem
'nuff sed.

 

What the deuce!!???? You mean you expect the steering wheel and the transmission to come with that vehicle? Well, that's extra.