Posted on 05/14/2011 7:41:53 PM PDT by decimon
>
The reason is that I have started using BitBox as my browser for my general work-related tasks. BitBox is essentially a heavily armored version of Firefox 4.0.1 that is encased in Oracle's VirtualBox virtual machine (VM) environment that houses a secured Debian 6 Linux OS. That sounds relatively complicated, but once it is installed, this secure version of Firefox works just like a regular version of the browser. The difference is that it runs in a virtualized environment that is separate from your Windows XP/Vista/7.
The upside clearly is that you are dealing with a self-contained package. If you click on malicious malware, the usual EXE files cannot be executed in your Linux VM. You can download files, but they will not explicitly affect your Windows system and need to be manually moved out of the VM, if you have connected the drives. malware that infects Firefox during your session is automatically deleted the next time you start BitBox, as it always starts with its default configuration in the way it was installed. However, phishing attacks that target your personal data and may trick you in providing critical information will still require some common sense not to do so and will not protect you from the effects of such actions.
There are a few downsides. First, it is a hefty 990 MB download and the installed software will require almost 2 GB of space, as there is a need for Oracle's VirtualBox that is included in the package as well as a Debian 6 installation. Since the software is set back to a default level at every time it starts, it is not the most convenient browser to be used on an every day basis for the consumer. The deal breaker is its language.
>
(Excerpt) Read more at tomsguide.com ...
Linux users have been saying that for 15 years.
I don't know why some folks poke fun at those of us that run VMs in Windows. I run VMWare on 64-bit Win7 that has a copy of WinXP with the VPN to my corporate network . Frankly, I don't know who would really want to run VPN software to their office using the same operating system that they are surfing the net with. I don't care what your primary operating system would be.
As it stands, I don't run browser queries off my corp net from within my XP VM and I don't run workrelated stuff from that primary Win7 install.
Also within that single XP VM I run Remote Desktop to several Windows servers and both Putty and Sun Secure Global Desktop to reach Unix boxes from time-to-time on my corpnet.
I don't need to run a Linux desktop.
I have always run as administrator with UAC turned off. Couldn't stand it any other way. :)
My reference was towards how on a Windows box an end user can right click on a shortcut/exe and select "Run As Administrator." Actually, I've seen that in Ubuntu lately when I've needed to install the VirtualBox Guest Additions. There's been a simple button where I can install them as administrator rather than having to use sudo. A vast improvement over having to teach someone how to use sudo at the terminal prompt.
I just wish there was a layer that could be provided for Linux where utilities could take on the name of the task which they perform, instead of all the crazy names they've got now.
“I have always run as administrator with UAC turned off. Couldn’t stand it any other way. :)”
Oh, oh, oh...
I gotta ask you something, I don’t mean to pry, but I have to know. Are you a Glock owner? Those things don’t have safeties.
When I read your post, I remembered that scene in Blackhawk Down where the commander sees a Delta with his rifle’s safety off. He says, “Soldier, your safety is off!” The Delta holds up his finger and says, “Sir, this is my safety!”
Sorry, just had to ask! :)
Gnip
Amen on that. I'm a big supporter of virtualization on the desktop. VPN is a perfect example of where a VM is not just desirable, but should be mandatory. Why the hell would I want to give my employer access to my network and devices at home?
I don't need to run a Linux desktop.
As a longtime unix user, I've found the windows UI and design paradigms are nothing but a boat anchor on my productivity, so I do the vast majority of my work on unix, with a VM to access those few walled in websites developed by people with a hammer and no other tools who were looking for nails.
There is no legitimate reason to have a website that is accessible to only windows computers.
You can always 'alias' any name to any other name. If you've got a list of your favorite names for commands that you want to popularize, create an rc script that you can source on login, and they can have their own list of commands to do things however you want.
The downside of this is that what is "common sense" for one person is completely cryptic to someone else. Do you mean that a computer used in Germany would have entirely different commands than one used in the U.S.? I suspect that in the long run such a system would prove to be confusing as anything you could imagine.
So, rather than using "cd" to change directories, should we instead have a command like:
change_direcory
or in modern, dumbed down Ms-windows parlance:
change_folder
or for our German friend:
unter_ordner
Yup. That just rolls off the tongue. :-)
Exactly! :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
