• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Fellow linux nerds

poweRob

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
83,677
Reaction score
58,352
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Watch yourself. Bad hack vulnerability for wifi...

WiFi Security Shredded via KRACK Attack

'Devastating' Against Linux, Sometimes Android

Vanhoef says the flaw affects everything from Android, Linux and Windows to Apple, OpenBSD, MediaTek, and Linksys, among other systems.

"Our key reinstallation attack is exceptionally devastating against Linux and Android 6.0 or higher," he says, noting that most attacks can only recover a subset of all communications. On Android and Linux devices, however, an attacker can typically obtain a complete copy of all communications. "This is because Android and Linux can be tricked into (re)installing an all-zero encryption key," he says, which makes it easy to decrypt all communications on the fly.​
 
It was only ever a matter of time. I no longer run Linux, but I'll still say, despite this, it's still the most secure OS out there.
 
KevinKohler said:
It was only ever a matter of time. I no longer run Linux, but I'll still say, despite this, it's still the most secure OS out there.
Click to expand...

Is it actually secure because of the OS itself? Or is it secure because it wouldn't be worth any hackers time to try to **** with a OS that only a handful of people actually use for regular computer activities?
 
jamesrage said:
Is it actually secure because of the OS itself? Or is it secure because it wouldn't be worth any hackers time to try to **** with a OS that only a handful of people actually use for regular computer activities?
Click to expand...

The second. It's supposed to be better coded because of open source, but that also makes it weaker to hacking.
 
jamesrage said:
Is it actually secure because of the OS itself? Or is it secure because it wouldn't be worth any hackers time to try to **** with a OS that only a handful of people actually use for regular computer activities?
Click to expand...

It's a WPA2 bug. Only applies to wifi devices. Linux, OpenBSD, and some others use this. Your ISP should have a patch, now or very soon. This bug was published Monday AM.
 
jamesrage said:
Is it actually secure because of the OS itself? Or is it secure because it wouldn't be worth any hackers time to try to **** with a OS that only a handful of people actually use for regular computer activities?
Click to expand...

The later. It's a paper tiger, just like Mac OS used to be.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
It's a WPA2 bug. Only applies to wifi devices. Linux, OpenBSD, and some others use this. Your ISP should have a patch, now or very soon. This bug was published Monday AM.
Click to expand...

I suspect that most router companies will have a patch out.. I don't know if all the routers will be fixed..
 
CletusWilbury said:
The second. It's supposed to be better coded because of open source, but that also makes it weaker to hacking.
Click to expand...

jamesrage said:
Is it actually secure because of the OS itself? Or is it secure because it wouldn't be worth any hackers time to try to **** with a OS that only a handful of people actually use for regular computer activities?
Click to expand...

It's actually more secure for three reasons.

  1. security by anonymity which is the clever way of saying what jamesrage said; and,
  2. Precisely because it's open source. When something goes wrong, the patch is far more immediate. You'll land your patch super-fast while your windows box is sitting around day by day waiting on MS to decide whether or not they are going to release the patch alone or wait to put it in their already scheduled release a month or several away.
  3. With a linux distro, you will be upgraded to the latest OS for free. Your OS will always be supported. You'll never be running some arcane OS that windows up and decided that it won't support anymore.
 
Last edited:
poweRob said:
It's actually more secure for three reasons.

  1. security by anonymity which is the clever way of saying what jamesrage said; and,
  2. Precisely because it's open source. When something goes wrong, the patch is far more immediate. You'll land your patch super-fast while your windows box is sitting around day by day waiting on MS to decide whether or not they are going to release the patch alone or wait to put it in their already scheduled release a month or several away.
  3. With a linux distro, you will be upgraded to the latest OS for free. Your OS will always be supported. You'll never be running some arcane OS that windows up and decided that it won't support anymore.
Click to expand...

As a Windows user I have discovered, the hard way, #3 is important.
Linux command names pissed me off. Caused by my poor memory, laziness and ignorance, no doubt.
 
poweRob said:
It's actually more secure for three reasons.
security by anonymity which is the clever way of saying what jamesrage said; and,
Click to expand...
This is true.. plus there is the saying you dont take a crap in your own bed... or something like that. Hackers tend to use Linux for their illegal actions and hence dont target Linux.
Precisely because it's open source. When something goes wrong, the patch is far more immediate. You'll land your patch super-fast while your windows box is sitting around day by day waiting on MS to decide whether or not they are going to release the patch alone or wait to put it in their already scheduled release a month or several away.
Click to expand...

Not true.. not even remotely. In fact, the latest "bug" that affected both Linux and Windows, Microsoft had already patched the bug when it hit the media. Has Linux finally gotten around to it? Bugs in Linux and security problems are around for a long time before they are patched... because Linux is so fragmented.

With a linux distro, you will be upgraded to the latest OS for free. Your OS will always be supported. You'll never be running some arcane OS that windows up and decided that it won't support anymore.
Click to expand...



Again not true. Upgrading Windows 10 is free. Support for older versions of linux by the big distros end faster than Microsoft ends their support.. if they even had any. Now the supposed good thing about Linux, is that it is opensource, so you just have to find a nerd you trust, and this nerd can support/fix any linux distro you are running for a long time.
 
PeteEU said:
This is true.. plus there is the saying you dont take a crap in your own bed... or something like that. Hackers tend to use Linux for their illegal actions and hence dont target Linux.

Not true.. not even remotely. In fact, the latest "bug" that affected both Linux and Windows, Microsoft had already patched the bug when it hit the media. Has Linux finally gotten around to it? Bugs in Linux and security problems are around for a long time before they are patched... because Linux is so fragmented.





Again not true. Upgrading Windows 10 is free. Support for older versions of linux by the big distros end faster than Microsoft ends their support.. if they even had any. Now the supposed good thing about Linux, is that it is opensource, so you just have to find a nerd you trust, and this nerd can support/fix any linux distro you are running for a long time.
Click to expand...

Windows has gotten better about patching. They used to be nightmare slowish. And as far as win10... aside from Ubuntu a few years back changing from Gnome to Unity, when you keep your system up to date in linux, your whole interface doesn't change. It's all background. You have the latest greatest releases every six months with patches happenining in the interim as needed. Which is far less than windows. Aside from that... linux is faster and the file system doesn't need constant defraging.
 
poweRob said:
Windows has gotten better about patching. They used to be nightmare slowish.
Click to expand...

No. Microsoft has had 2nd Tuesday patch day since Windows XP (2003 to be exact). Patches came out relatively fast, especially compared to Linux and OSX.

And as far as win10... aside from Ubuntu a few years back changing from Gnome to Unity, when you keep your system up to date in linux, your whole interface doesn't change. It's all background. You have the latest greatest releases every six months with patches happenining in the interim as needed. Which is far less than windows.
Click to expand...

Not exactly true. All operating systems change over time, visually. Linux Mint has changed over time, Ubuntu (as you pointed out) has changed over time and there are tons of linux distros that dont look at all like each other. It is however all visual.

What should not change is the functionality behind the visual aspect, and here Windows, like Linux, has not changed much since I would say Windows 1.0 The basic functions are often the same thing, and over the years new functions have been added. What has changed is the visual aspect.

Take file explorer (for you OSX nerds.. Finder, just way better). It has changed visually over the years a lot, but the functionality has stayed the same. Back in the old days, there was no "favourites" or pinnable aspects in File Explorer, but that was added over time. Yes many still dont use it, because they dont understand the idea of pinning/favoriting your folders for easy access. It did not help that Microsoft changed the name of this at least once either.. use to be called Library and in Windows 10 it is called Quick access. But the functionality of the File Explorer is today, the same as it was in Windows 3.11 and even Windows 1.0, and certainly in 98, XP, Vista, 7 and 8.

Aside from that... linux is faster and the file system doesn't need constant defraging.
Click to expand...

Seriously, when was the last time you used a windows machine and did a defrag? You do know that defrag is done automatically in the background since Vista right, and that it is not needed on an SSD?

As for being faster.. no. It is different and linux has tons of limitations relative to Windows.. which comes down to the lack of universal support by manufactures towards Linux.
 
jamesrage said:
Is it actually secure because of the OS itself? Or is it secure because it wouldn't be worth any hackers time to try to **** with a OS that only a handful of people actually use for regular computer activities?
Click to expand...

It used to be the latter, but Linux is becoming an overwhelmingly large part of the underlying platform of the internet in general. Most large storage environments run on or on top of some form of Linux because when developing an appliance it is far easier to start with Linux and build up. Android, iOS along with most routers and switches run some form of Linux as well.
 
PeteEU said:
No. Microsoft has had 2nd Tuesday patch day since Windows XP (2003 to be exact). Patches came out relatively fast, especially compared to Linux and OSX.



Not exactly true. All operating systems change over time, visually. Linux Mint has changed over time, Ubuntu (as you pointed out) has changed over time and there are tons of linux distros that dont look at all like each other. It is however all visual.

What should not change is the functionality behind the visual aspect, and here Windows, like Linux, has not changed much since I would say Windows 1.0 The basic functions are often the same thing, and over the years new functions have been added. What has changed is the visual aspect.

Take file explorer (for you OSX nerds.. Finder, just way better). It has changed visually over the years a lot, but the functionality has stayed the same. Back in the old days, there was no "favourites" or pinnable aspects in File Explorer, but that was added over time. Yes many still dont use it, because they dont understand the idea of pinning/favoriting your folders for easy access. It did not help that Microsoft changed the name of this at least once either.. use to be called Library and in Windows 10 it is called Quick access. But the functionality of the File Explorer is today, the same as it was in Windows 3.11 and even Windows 1.0, and certainly in 98, XP, Vista, 7 and 8.



Seriously, when was the last time you used a windows machine and did a defrag? You do know that defrag is done automatically in the background since Vista right, and that it is not needed on an SSD?

As for being faster.. no. It is different and linux has tons of limitations relative to Windows.. which comes down to the lack of universal support by manufactures towards Linux.
Click to expand...

I have defrag happening at night. Still has to defrag. Linux?... no. Faster kernal. Still more secure. Still runs on the majority of servers on the internet. Still running almost all the top 500 supercomputers. My personal beef is that I have to deal with driver issues with windows all the damn time it seems.

Almost all the world's fastest supercomputers run Linux

The TOP500 List shows 498 out of 500 of the speediest computers on the planet are running Linux. Linux has long-dominated the supercomputer ratings, but now it's getting close to knocking out all its competition.

Other than systems running Linux, there are two Chinese supercomputers running IBM AIX, a Unix variant. This pair, tied at 386 and 387, may not be long for the list. That's because supercomputers are growing ever faster.​

About the only thing keeping me from going 100% is Blizzard games. And my wife.
 
Last edited:
poweRob said:
I have defrag happening at night. Still has to defrag. Linux?... no. Faster kernal. Still more secure. Still runs on the majority of servers on the internet. Still running almost all the top 500 supercomputers.

Almost all the world's fastest supercomputers run Linux

The TOP500 List shows 498 out of 500 of the speediest computers on the planet are running Linux. Linux has long-dominated the supercomputer ratings, but now it's getting close to knocking out all its competition.

Other than systems running Linux, there are two Chinese supercomputers running IBM AIX, a Unix variant. This pair, tied at 386 and 387, may not be long for the list. That's because supercomputers are growing ever faster.​

About the only thing keeping me from going 100% is Blizzard games. And my wife.
Click to expand...

Funny, not defragged a computer since Vista. XP needed it yes, but since Vista.. naw. And since the SSD, it is certainly not needed.

As for faster kernel.. that is correct up to a point. But as you state, no games for Linux.. or quality software to be frank. And dont even try to say that Open Office or Libre Office is as good or better than Microsoft Office.
 
PeteEU said:
Funny, not defragged a computer since Vista. XP needed it yes, but since Vista.. naw. And since the SSD, it is certainly not needed.

As for faster kernel.. that is correct up to a point. But as you state, no games for Linux.. or quality software to be frank. And dont even try to say that Open Office or Libre Office is as good or better than Microsoft Office.
Click to expand...

MS Office is supreme. No doubt. It's not even close. But for what the vast bulk of what people do, Open Office is fine. My beef with MS Office is it's proprietary file formatting instead of using Open Document format to be more compatible with other software. Software is becoming more and more web/cloud based so as that happens windows will take a further back seat to performance.
 
On the computer I am right now I dual boot with Linux Mint and Win 10.

Mint boots up MUCH faster and updates in minutes, where Win 10 takes much longer. That said Win 10 runs smoother on this PC, video and scrolling, so I mostly use Win 10 now.

There are 4 laptops in my house, all Chromebooks. All my kids have a Chromebook, and I'm reading they're are pretty much taking over in schools and colleges. They're damn secure, fast, and inexpensive.

Commercial over. ;)
 
PeteEU said:
Funny, not defragged a computer since Vista. XP needed it yes, but since Vista.. naw. And since the SSD, it is certainly not needed.

As for faster kernel.. that is correct up to a point. But as you state, no games for Linux.. or quality software to be frank. And dont even try to say that Open Office or Libre Office is as good or better than Microsoft Office.
Click to expand...

For my needs, it is. Of course, I don't run a business, I use it for at home items only.
 
On ubuntu so I swung by to see what-up. I have an android too.

I will investigate BRB.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom