Vista disables Cool'N'Quiet on some motherboards

[nobody]

A lot of people still don't know there is an alternative. And like you
said, a lot of people don't care, as long as the PC does what they
need it for.

Which means a pre-installed Linux box is just as good, if not better,
for the non-gaming majority, who just want to surf web, check email,
do some office work and chat on IM, as a pre-installed Windows box.
Except they wouldn't have problems with viruses, built-in spyware and
what not "features".

As soon as Linux gets installed base sizeable enough for bad guys to
care, they will start writing malware specifically targeting it.
Ditto Mac. for Linux, writing malware would be even easier than for
MS, exactly because of its Open Source nature. It's just that the
malware writers don't care about the market share of less than 10%
when they can spend the same effort going after remaining 90++.

NNN

 

[Wes Newell]

As soon as Linux gets installed base sizeable enough for bad guys to
care, they will start writing malware specifically targeting it.
Ditto Mac. for Linux, writing malware would be even easier than for
MS, exactly because of its Open Source nature. It's just that the
malware writers don't care about the market share of less than 10%
when they can spend the same effort going after remaining 90++.

They can write crap all they want to. It can't do anything without root
access, which it won't have. It can't even write to a file anywhere
without permissions. Have you ever used Linux? The is the boot directory.
See what happens when even the user tries to remove a file. ls=dir, rm=del.

[wes@wes2 boot]$ ls
boot.0300 config-2.6.20 kernel.h-2.6.20 System.map-2.6.17.8
boot.0340 grub/ lost+found/ System.map-2.6.20
boot.0800 initrd-2.6.17.8.img map us.klt
boot.1640 initrd-2.6.20.img message@ vmlinuz@
boot.2100 initrd.img@ message-graphic vmlinuz-2.6.17.8
config@ kernel.h@ message-text vmlinuz-2.6.20
config-2.6.17.8 kernel.h-2.6.17.8 System.map@
[wes@wes2 boot]$ rm config-2.6.20
rm: remove write-protected regular file `config-2.6.20'? y
rm: cannot remove `config-2.6.20': Permission denied
[wes@wes2 boot]$

 

[MattersNot]

BIOS can send message on boot. But icon in system tray is an OS thing.


And then bios is usually right (it has the information which NIC has, to
turn that little green LED at the ethernet socket).

rgds

You are wrong on this. I have tried it. The BIOS sends out
that exact message and it is placed in the system tray. XP
does the same thing also.

Take it or leave it, I don't care.

 

[Carlo Razzeto]

They can write crap all they want to. It can't do anything without root
access, which it won't have. It can't even write to a file anywhere
without permissions. Have you ever used Linux? The is the boot directory.
See what happens when even the user tries to remove a file. ls=dir,
rm=del.

<snip>

Funny thing you don't realize, same is true for windows... My parents used
to have horrible malware issues... I turned off admin for everyone in my
family except my account, and lo and behold... no more malware issues at
all!! imagine that... So imagine how well Linux will do with every idiot in
the world logging in as root all of the damn time.

Carlo

 

[Benjamin Gawert]

* Carlo Razzeto:

Funny thing you don't realize, same is true for windows... My parents
used to have horrible malware issues... I turned off admin for everyone
in my family except my account, and lo and behold... no more malware
issues at all!! imagine that... So imagine how well Linux will do with
every idiot in the world logging in as root all of the damn time.

Exactly...

BTW: most people think "virus" when talking about malware. But today
viri only are a very small part of the malware problems. Most malware
today uses security holes to gain system access. Unlike old viri which
had the goal of destroying data todays malware wants to prepare the
target system for being taken over to use it as DoS source, SPAM relay
or to spy user data (name/pasword combinations, credit card data,
registration codes etc)...

Linux is quite immune to viri due to it's security concept, much more
than Windows. But it does have security holes which can be (and are!)
used to break into a Linux system. Same is valid for most other
operating systems (incl. MacOS X and even Enterprise UNIXes) btw (the
only OS that is regarded as "unhackable" is OpenVMS)...

Benjamin

 

[daytripper]

(the only OS that is regarded as "unhackable" is OpenVMS)...

And may it rest in peace...

 

[Alexander Grigoriev]

all!! imagine that... So imagine how well Linux will do with every idiot
in the world logging in as root all of the damn time.

Lindows (AKA Linspire now)...

 

[Alexander Grigoriev]

* Carlo Razzeto:

Which exactly security concept in Linux is better than in NT-based Windows?

 

[Sebastian Kaliszewski]

You are wrong on this. I have tried it. The BIOS sends out that exact
message and it is placed in the system tray. XP does the same thing also.

Nope. XP for example displays in national language.

Then the same nonsense happens with wireless connection as well.

Take it or leave it, I don't care.

Whatever.

rgds
\SK

 

[Sebastian Kaliszewski]

Which exactly security concept in Linux is better than in NT-based Windows?

That apps can't send message to arbitrary widnows (if it's even an system
window).
That it's not possible to send message to some control causing it to for
exampel chage it's char count limit.

etc...

rgds
\SK

 

[Sebastian Kaliszewski]

Lindows (AKA Linspire now)...

Just one broken example. This is not default on practically all other
desktop distributions.

That's versus Windows which instlass in such way by default.

Then add Home Edition crap where file protection is turned off...

rgds
\SK

 

[Carlo Razzeto]

Alexander Grigoriev wrote:

Just one broken example. This is not default on practically all other
desktop distributions.

That's versus Windows which instlass in such way by default.

Then add Home Edition crap where file protection is turned off...

rgds
\SK

Which is why we have come to windows vista which has done it's best to
eliminate (rather hide is more appropriate) administrator. It's an
interesting idea, which still requires qutie a bit of tweeking.. But I think
Microsoft knowing their customers is moving in the right direction... And
even added in a few security features that in my opion Linux could stand to
implement their own versions of (user mode drivers, no direct access to the
kernel etc)...

 

[Tony Hill]

So it's even more worthless. Knowing how the accept bug reports (try to
report something to them, good luck) that number is meaningless.

It's only meaningless if you don't understand it. For anyone who's
worked with commercial software it is very meaningful.

Or things like that infamous search utility which didn't work for how many
years?

What exactly was not working with this search utility? I know you
complained about a bug in 'Find.exe', though the only one I'm aware of
is one that was fixed with Win2K SP2, 6 years ago. It's not exactly a
tool that they've had much reason to change for quite a few years.

Of course they track. They might forward those further, but they track them.

For the most part they do not track them in their own bug tracking
system, but rather refer them on to the bug tracking of the individual
application.

Nope. It would be tracked there as well (at least RedHat does).

If RedHat does then they are in the minority in this regard.

Please, try to understand what you read (and in fact write). You wrote:
"The Linux kernel is extremely solid, and certain *key applications* are
well tested and very reliable". I think that GUI is a key application.

It is certainly a key application. MPlayer (or any alternative to
Windows Media Player) is not a key application and has had MORE then
it's fair share of bugs simply in getting it packaged and distributed
with all the accompanied packages to make it useful without running
into dependancy hell.

It's not only that. Like the idiotic stuff wioth that disconnected cable --
this plain bug, and easy to fix in fact (istead of trying to ping MS server
or whatever thing they do, they shuld just ping the configured gatway first
and only if gateway does not respond to pings they could try pinging
something outside, just to be on the safe side if someome (mis)configured
gatway to not respond to pings). Gosh, I've come with that fix in just 5
minutes.

WIthout knowing the specifics of your setup I couldn't tell you too
much except that that "Network Cable Unplugged" messages comes from
the data link layer. It shows up only if the network card does not
get any link presence detected, no pinging of ANYTHING, Microsoft of
otherwise. You don't even need an IP address, just plugging a cable
from your PC to a dumb hub with no connection to the outside world
clears up that message under any normal situation. This whole thing
is pretty much exclusively controlled by the hardware and NIC drivers.

 

[Tony Hill]

They can write crap all they want to. It can't do anything without root
access, which it won't have. It can't even write to a file anywhere
without permissions.

If that were all that was required for a system to be secure then
Vista would be 100% secure since all users are only "Standard Users"
(non-Admins) under all default situations.

Have you ever used Linux? The is the boot directory.
See what happens when even the user tries to remove a file. ls=dir, rm=del.

Most users that are going to the command line in Linux aren't getting
much malware in ANY OS. It's the people who don't know/don't care
about getting to know the guts of their computer that get malware.
They've got better things to do with their lives then to muck around
with this stuff, they just want their system to work. When they
install a new app and they get a pop-up requesting admin access they
are either going to stop, think and decide if the application is safe,
or they blindly write in their admin password. This can happen in
Windows Vista, Linux or OS X, all three now use a very similar setup
in this regard.

Sadly, while this is an important first step, more then this is
required to make a system secure. Security of any OS is not something
that can be taken lightly, it needs to be well thought out from the
ground up. Before WinXP SP2 Microsoft did a VERY poor job of thinking
this through, opting for the "easy and dumb" solution instead. The
reason why MS had so many security problems, beyond the obvious issue
of popularity, is because their whole design concept was bad. It
didn't matter how many patches they released to plug holes, it was
never going to fix the underlying concept. They finally changed this
around for SP2 and have taken it further with Vista.

 

[nobody]

They finally changed this
around for SP2 and have taken it further with Vista.

So much so that I have to give my 6 year old admin access on her new
box (I was stupid to set it up with XP SP2 - should've opted for 2k)
whenever she wants to play some of her favorite games (she likes some
DOS-based oldies). There is not even an option "run as different
user" that I could set up the games under her account, or I just could
not locate it by quick looking. Any idea, anyone? TIA

NNN

 

[Sebastian Kaliszewski]

It's only meaningless if you don't understand it. For anyone who's
worked with commercial software it is very meaningful.

I do work with (and on) commercial software. Hence I know that this numebr
is meaningless. It has only some meaning if bug reporting & handling policy
is given.

What exactly was not working with this search utility? I know you
complained about a bug in 'Find.exe', though the only one I'm aware of
is one that was fixed with Win2K SP2, 6 years ago. It's not exactly a
tool that they've had much reason to change for quite a few years.

It was finally fixed in Win2K. It was broken (it was simply unsuable as it
could not find data which was obvoiusly there) for so many years.

And Find.exe is rather trivial little tool.

I've somewhat little trust in bug handling capability of a company which
could not fix their trivial accompanying apps for so many years.

If RedHat does then they are in the minority in this regard.

Well, you get what you pay for.

RedHat has wide betatest system via Fedora Core. When they go to RHEL it is
stable system.

It is certainly a key application. MPlayer (or any alternative to
Windows Media Player) is not a key application and has had MORE then
it's fair share of bugs simply in getting it packaged and distributed
with all the accompanied packages to make it useful without running
into dependancy hell.

Now compare what you can play with default install of MPlayer and Windows
Media Player

WIthout knowing the specifics of your setup I couldn't tell you too
much except that that "Network Cable Unplugged" messages comes from
the data link layer. It shows up only if the network card does not
get any link presence detected, no pinging of ANYTHING, Microsoft of
otherwise. You don't even need an IP address, just plugging a cable
from your PC to a dumb hub with no connection to the outside world
clears up that message under any normal situation. This whole thing
is pretty much exclusively controlled by the hardware and NIC drivers.

Yes, it should work that way. But someone was "smarter" than that. Maybe
it's Intel, that's their chipset (it's Centrino notebook).

BTW the same is with WiFi in that machine -- it says it has found my access
point, performed the connection and then says that link doesn't work (which
is nonsense, as I can transfer files via that link).

rgds

 

[beoweolf]

Us the "Run as" command ... or possibly create a script? This would allow
the game (or an application) to run under old rights, environment without
actually giving elevated permissions to your 6 year old.

Also check the "compat" (compatibility) option which allows programs to run
in a pre-2000 environment.

Check "Help /support" for commands, syntax and applicability.

 

[Tony Hill]

It was finally fixed in Win2K. It was broken (it was simply unsuable as it
could not find data which was obvoiusly there) for so many years.

So basically your example is agreeing with me that Microsoft did a
terrible job with software quality up until Win2K. After that point
they improved dramatically.

Now compare what you can play with default install of MPlayer and Windows
Media Player

That depends on what distribution because there are so many different
ways that MPlayer gets packaged up. It needs MANY libraries to be
useful at all, not to mention some kind of GUI. When it IS installed
correctly though it can be a very good player. I use it because I can
get the dependancy nonsense sorted out and I don't mind spending an
hour or two doing so. But most people don't care about this sort of
stuff enough for it to be worth their time, they just want something
that works. This is why Ubuntu holds a MUCH larger chance of
succeeding on the desktop then Redhat.

 

[Tony Hill]

So much so that I have to give my 6 year old admin access on her new
box (I was stupid to set it up with XP SP2 - should've opted for 2k)
whenever she wants to play some of her favorite games (she likes some
DOS-based oldies).

Most of the problems I've encountered have to do with applications
being absolutely moronic about file permissions (ie they just assume
that they can write data anywhere and everywhere and crash when such a
write fails). If you can figure out where the game needs write
permissions you might be able to resolve this.

This is easy enough to test for DOS programs since they usually reside
entirely within one folder. Just give her user account full
read/write access to that folder and see if it works as a non-admin.
If so you can then optionally try to narrow down exactly what files
and/or directories specifically require the read/write access and what
ones can do with only read access.

There is not even an option "run as different
user" that I could set up the games under her account, or I just could
not locate it by quick looking. Any idea, anyone? TIA

The 'Run As' command will take care of this, though it's
implementation leaves a bit to be desired. Try something like the
following command line:

runas /savecred /user:mymachine\admin application

A few points of note though, the '/savecred' option will allow you to
run it without entering a password every time, but it's only
implemented in WinXP Profession, disabled in XP Home (I don't know
about Media Center). The 'mymachine' is the hostname of your computer
and 'admin' is the user account of the administrator for which you
want to run the application.

Also note that, as with 'sudo' in the *nix world, the 'runas' command
should be looked at as something of a last resort for non-admin tasks.
Ideally you want her to be able to play the games simply as a standard
user account, which is usually possible by simply adjusting file
permissions.

 

[Alexander Grigoriev]

That was unfortunate legacy concept, although it's not kernel-related
(repeat "Linux is kernel" mantra). Note that it's very discouraged to run
GUI from a high-privileged (LOCAL_SYSTEM) account.

Fortunately, in Vista, cross-account window messages are not allowed now.