Posted on 09/09/2005 9:43:47 AM PDT by Bush2000
Get an AMD64 and XP SP2 and buffer overflows will not compromise your machine.
As an expert, I resent that.
IDN has been nothing but a pain, I just wish they would disable it by default!
Thanks fot the heads up. I'll update to the patch which should be released tomorrow. :-)
You're an expert? Where and what did you pert, and why did you quit?
I was kidding. I would never call myself an expert because an expert knows everything and I learn something new every day.
1. what is this whole buffer overflow problem. it would seem 99% of all security problems have to do with buffer overflows, is it that hard to program in way to stop these sort of problems.
2. not a flame starter but does linux products run into buffer overflow security problems?
Yes, linux products also have these flaws. It has more to do with the tool you are using for development and the skill of the programmer in trapping them.
The good side to this, though, is that with OSS, the patches are released much sooner than their counterparts in proprietary software. This is due to several factors, not the least of which is that the maintainer of the particular vulnerable product doesn't usually have 16 other priorities on his desk. Once he knows about it, it's fairly simple to fix and release a patch.
I would say so. "Linux" is under no pressure to integrate apps into the kernel space, and kernel-space developers can actually design it porperly, without all sorts of rigging to get certain apps to work.
The separation of "control" also means that no one person or group can make bad decisions without being called on it. If you ever get the urge, hang out on some of the mailing lists for linux, and you'll see all sorts of discussion going on about the best way to implement a certain feature or idea. Once the pros and cons are weighed out, then the design is implemented.
Probably the greatest innovation OSS has contributed to the world is not the software itself, but the methods by which that software is designed, coded, implemented, and tested. A proprietary company just doesn't have the resources that OSS does for that kind of development.
Everything programmed in C or other non-memory-safe languages can have a buffer overflow. It's up to the coders to properly monitor memory allocation, and nobody's perfect.
i've seen that bleed over into the windows world as well. one of my favorite programs gb-pvr is like mythtv. it's not open source but it is open platform. at first several people developed add on programs to it. as time went on the better programs emerged and over shadowed the inferior programs. at that time the 2nd place programmers often joined the the top dog to help improve his application, or just plain gave up.
perhaps linux greatest contribution will be to change how windows programs are designed and improved. somewhat like how third parties effect our two party political process.
when the day comes when programs can ran on all platforms then windows will have to go toe to toe with the linux kernel. i would like to see that day when i can bring my aplications from OS to OS and have the different operating systems fight it over for users.
What kind of pain? I've installed about thirty copies, including some upgrades from 98 and ME, without any significant problems. Most of the hangups have been with older machines that had been infected with spyware.
Even these have not presented any real problem.
On some machines I've replaced the Windows firewall with free ZoneAlarm, because it controls outgoing internet access and is easy to use.
i'm with you on this. i have boxes with AMDs i like them but i don't know why they would be any more secure. is there any reason with that.
SP2=crap, crap and more crap. i must say my surfing pool is pretty small so i don't get into waters filled with sharks. security hasn't been a big problem for me.
fixing a MS computer for others have been pretty easy.
1.run>msconfig>uncheck all startups
2.deselect auto update from microsoft
3.tell them to stop surfing porn and downloading pirated software.
IMO:the reason linux has less security problems.
1.less of a target
2.smarter users(aviod websites and downloads that can hurt them)
3.they don't need pirated software
oh i get it, your one of those who believes that if everyone switched to linux all the virus writers would give up and start a peaceful life of planting flowers and kissing babies.
how is your kool aide tasting?
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.