Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by linux_learner

  1. cvs= current version system as far as kde 3.2.92 i believe the .92 refers to mandrake 9.2. i would be carefull however. later on when kde 3.2 goes to 3.2.1 and you have 3.2.92 the system will see the 3.2.92 as newer than the 3.2.1 even tho 3.2.1 is actually newer.
  2. linux_learner

    Nmap v3.45

    knowing which ports to block can be tough to know. the best policy is if you dont need it or use it, block it. other than that, here is an extensive list of trojan ports to block http://doshelp.com/trojanports.htm
  3. i used to have a similar prob. i had to kill the firewalld (iptables) and load the script. i used "arno's firewall" awesome script. great firewall. i just had to kill the iptables after i booted up, connect to the net, then load arno's firewall. i'm sure theres a slightly better way to do this, but arno's firewall is probably the best iptables script out there. http://freshmeat.net/projects/iptables-fir...l/?topic_id=151 hope this 's
  4. yes, seperate geographical areas. i dont necissarily like the idea of one computer being the NAT. i was thinking more along the lines of a wheel configuration. all broadcasting the same ip to the dns (ex. www.google.com ) perhaps if each computer used a router w/nat and they were all on the same subnet (somehow, maybe through vpn). the idea to this is to create a web of nodes all inter connected to each other to finnally go to the single dns. i have also been thinking about having a couple NAT ip's so i could set up a ddns and rotate the ip's.
  5. just remember hda is the master hard drive and hdb is the slave. if you want to install red hat on the slave then formate hdb with the file system of your choice. then install. enjoy
  6. my router has NAT, altho i'm not sure how to use it. i need to know however, how to accomplish this from accross the country. point a is say west coast, point b is east coast. dns is is the name of the web site. how would i accomplish this?
  7. i didnt even know we could do this in linux until a few months ago. there are a couple ways to do this: a) MCC >> System >> Backup B) command line. the linux documentation project has a nice howto on this. a rather long howto. you can back up a single file, or the entire system in linux. unlike windows.
  8. kinda. i'm more lookin at a wan. networking a wan and accomplishing this. from what i understand, NAT is the way to go. thanks for the replies thus far.
  9. i have a question that probably most of yall will say is impossible, prob is, i dont accept "thats impossible". why? because we can do anything, its just a matter of figuring out how. having said that, heres my question. i want to have multiple computers share the same ip address at the same time. how do we make this happen? its for a web server. there would be one dns, but each computer is connected to the other like a node, a hop, using ipsec, and ip masking. all computers would be broadcasting the same ip address to the single dns. this is as well as i can explain it for now. if you have any questions, ask me.
  10. way cool! i have been wanting to get the selinux kernel enhancement, now its in 2.6 :D
  11. i think i saw somethin about the LG cd roms needing windows drivers. i just wanted some clarification on this is all. thanks for all the feedback.
  12. thanks for lookin'. i havent found anything about windows destroying LG cd roms. http://www.lge.com/about/news/news_list.js...2&searchstring= and http://news.google.com/news?q=LG+cd+rom&hl...ion=us&filter=0 neither site mentions any problem with windows. rather LG says the solution is to get the kernel 2.4.22-21
  13. in other words LG made some crap and mandrake is takin the heat for it. go figure. i didnt know this happened with windows to, could you show the link supporting that please? and i dont mean the gentoo forum, some sort of news bullitin or something.
  14. talking about which version of an OS is more secure is obscure at best. NT 4.0 can be said to be more secure than 2000 or XP because its had more time to have the holes plugged. in retrospect 2000 has over 60,000 known known vulnerabilities. XP has had a couple of FBI warnings about it. does that mean XP is more secure than 2000 and 2000 is more secure than NT? no. it seems everytime M$ tries to patch something, they need a patch for the patch. alot of the windows exploits are exploited again and again, even after applying said patch.
  15. a file system alone doesnt make things more secure. security is a process. does longhorn still use activeX? does longhorn still use visual basic and visual basic scripting? does longhorn set up users with admin priveledges? the answer for NT to XP is yes. i canabolised my XP. i removed activeX, VBSscript, IE, windows media player, outlook express, M$ office, MSN Explorer, windows messenger, MSN messenger, IIS, and a few other things. installed on NTFS, using a firewall blocking most ports. can XP be made secure? sure, i did :wink: would others wanna do what i did? not likely. linux security: multiple partitions, each a different file system. encryption. admin account set up by default, and user account and permissions also set up by default. services can be turned off easily. securetty can be commented out. iptables can be configured with front end clients or with scripts. M$ is always taunting their latest OS is the "most secure, most stable ever" and always falling dismally short. at my work they run NT 4.0 with sp 6. i have been able to easily hack the system and get to the registry editor (not that i did anything). it was through using an every day tool, IE. i clicked on the favorites folder, which opened up the side panel. in the side panel it had folders containing links. i right clicked that and chose "explore". from there i was on my way to the registry editor. in linux this never would have happened. i might have been able to view the registry editor in linux, but not make changes to it, due to permissions. do you think M$ has fixed these kind of fundamental security issues? not likely! it would take a fundamental reworking of the windows OS.
  16. i would, my friend, but my cable connection is dhcp. kinda hard to host an ftp server when my ip changes every so often.
  17. i dont trust anyone for anything. this makes good security sence. there are a number of good linux security administration sites. i also found the book "hacking linux exposed" a great resource. in order to secure your system, you must think like a hacker. i do realise how annoying this can be, to have been hacked. while hackers such as this should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, i do believe they also do us a favor. forcing us to secure what we niavely took for granted. forcing bad code in software to be fixed. security isnt like a firewall, or patches. security is a process. it is a process of checking logs, IDS, port scanning, patches and such. one that must continually, vigilantly be done. our job is to out hack the hacker. so while your anger is understandable, take this time to learn from it, to prevent it from happening again. if your ISP hasnt already taken messures to fix this vulnerability, then you might consider advising them :wink: , and of course they should report it to the authorities. in order for the law to prosecute, the damage has to be in exccess of $5000. the damage, however can include investigation.
  18. i had similar problems goin from 8.0 and up. 8.0 worked beutifully. detected all my hardware, no problem. since then, the higher versions dont like my ps2 mouse, so i switched to my trackball (usb). durring install my keyboard doesnt work, but after install it does. i am running 9.2 cooker with some variations. i added kde 3.1.4 for 9.1 and some other stuff. i lost some stuff goin from 9.1 to 9.2 and i hope to get them back (apps, not documents. apps like knode).
  19. salt lick? is that all? i take what they say with a whole salt mine! i brought up the points i did before to simply make a case, that people dont report accurately. alot of reporting is based on sponsorship, and who does the most sponsoring? M$! so its only natural we'd see articles such as this. however, this does bring to mind one verry important question.....what is considered a "reputable" source? is it based on so and so's opinion? facts can easily be construed. i remember when server 2003 came out, and M$ claimed it was faster than linux. they had the white papers to prove it. what they didnt tell you was, they had given verry specific instructions to the testers on how to optimise server 2003. linux was given no such advantage. we all know from experience, how easy it is to not fully optimise linux. just some things to think about
  20. forbes is so bad at this, that i think their known as linux bashers. 'course consumer reports is comming close to that to. consumer reports did a comparison between lindows and XP and totally slammed lindows (not that i'm in favor of lindows at all, but it goes to show a lack of reporting). i think it funny how people call us linux zealots, and a whole lot of other names. we're in the severe minority, of which most of us have come from a windows background. how then can we be brainwashed as some claim? what? because we hold a different oppinion than the majority? its amazing how little people consider the facts. when people do switch over to linux, they often get frustrated because theres no M$ office, no outlook express, doesnt install like windows and so on. as to the people who think we're nuts, brainwashed, linux does no advertising. the only thing we have is our own experience. can we help it if it matches so many other peoples experience? yet the M$ crowd tries to point out the "success" rate by all the people who have had positive experiences with windows, and their not considered brainwashed. basically it comes down to double standards. when people start expecting linux to be windows, thats when they've gone wrong. windows now has a hardware compatibility list, so why should linux be penalized for hardware compatibility? perhaps because M$ has alot of reporters in their pocket, and the rest are just plain ignorant. well, i'll leave this for now. i could go on and on with this :wink:
  21. which one to download first? if you use urpmi it will resolve that problem. urpmi kdebase-3.1.4 wheres the url? http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/distribut...drake/9.1/rpms/ you can ofcourse add this to your ftp medium. how do you add an ftp medium? http://www.urpmi.org/en/man-html/urpmi.addmedia.php
  22. it seems to be primarily for windows users. not much help if your in linux. downloading a small file, presumably an .exe, that does things to the registry, potentially causing a stop code (blue screen of death). theres gotta be a better way.
  23. true enough, and i bought a boxed set. mandrake 9.1 powerpack. i preordered the set, and waited, and waited, and waited. my set arrived long after the iso's were available. i tried using the web help that comes with the boxed set, and got no help, not even one reply. i love mandrake the OS, but as a company, they need some serious work. i'll agree that having mandrake go under would be a bad thing. for one i'd miss my favorite distro, but wal-mart also sells pc's with mandrake linux preinstalled. theirs only one other distro that comes preinstalled. any one wanna guess? its Lindows (pukes). Dell, HP, Gateway, and IBM also sell pc's with linux. whether its preinstalled that i dont know. Dell, HP, Gateway, and IBM also offer more flavors and no Lindows (thank heavens). mandrake (as far as i can tell) doesnt have stock. their not on NASDAQ or DOW JONES. redhat is. i would like to see mandrake in the stock market (i'd like to buy mandrake stock), but for now i'm happy that their out of chapter 11. best buy is starting to consider puttting linux on display. to actually put pc's with linux preinstalled on display. which distro would they go with? i havent a clue. i keep tryin to get best buy and circuit city to do linux. it looks like best buy might some time soon. should we make iso's? ehh, debatable. maybe it would light a fire under mandrake. another thing to think about. there are over 180 distros, do you really think one more is gonna make any difference? mandrake started off as a clone of redhat, but many distros remain small. like sorceror. its a variant of gentoo, but about to go under cause it just isnt popular enough. how many mirrors are there? quite alot. if someone did this they would need; a static ip addy, and a quick way to advertise their mirror, to pose any threat to mandrake. other wise it might as well be kind of an ftp thing. a peer to peer thing. your concern for the company is admirable. i can think of ways to improve the distro, but improving the company seems to be a more illusive task.
  24. whos to stop a club member or contributor from downloading the iso's and then making a mirror and releasing it there? one could take the rpm's in the cooker now and make a set of iso's out of it. the mandrake web site tells you how to make iso's from the cooker.
  25. most of these books you mentioned tell us to use the man pages, which has tar, and apt-get in them. there is no way a book can cover everything about linux. one book i found worth the investment was "hacking linux exposed 2nd edition". in the windows world, books dont tell you everything. neither do the web sites. i guess its that the books are designed to give you a grounding, not spoon feed you every detail.
  • Create New...