Why do you prefer *nix?

[voidmain]

Good post penrod but you're going to get flamed on the file permissions thing.  File permissions existed on WinNT 3.5-4.0 and Win2000 using NTFS filsystems.  But they certainly didn't do a good job of implementing it.

[<Zombie9920>]

Don't get me started on file permissions. BAck when I was running Win2K I had all of my MP3s, important documents, pics, etc. password protected. I was ignorant and I didn't have any AV software on the system because I thought I would never need it. Anyhow, I got an E-Mail worm that screwed up my boot sector and I had to do a repair install of Win2K after I cleaned the virus from the boot sector. When I finished installing Win2K again I was locked out of every file I had protected because I was setup with a new hostname number. No matter what I did I couldn't get back into my files, I couldn't delete the files or anything. So I eventually did a low level format on my hard drive and started with a clean slate. I lost over 40gig worth of stuff because of NTFS file security.  

[voidmain]

quote:Originally posted by <Zombie9920>:
Don't get me started on file permissions. BAck when I was running Win2K I had all of my MP3s, important documents, pics, etc. password protected. I was ignorant and I didn't have any AV software on the system because I thought I would never need it. Anyhow, I got an E-Mail worm that screwed up my boot sector and I had to do a repair install of Win2K after I cleaned the virus from the boot sector. When I finished installing Win2K again I was locked out of every file I had protected because I was setup with a new hostname number. No matter what I did I couldn't get back into my files, I couldn't delete the files or anything. So I eventually did a low level format on my hard drive and started with a clean slate. I lost over 40gig worth of stuff because of NTFS file security.      

Again, I don't want to defend microsoft because they suck but... What do you mean you password protected your files?  I assume you mean you set the file permissions so that only you could read them and when you reinstalled the OS your SID changed in the SAM.  Did you try and "take ownership" on all the directories that denied you access?  And then recursively set the permissions to "Everyone:FullControl"?   If you used NTFS you should have had no problem recovering them (unless of course the drive was more damaged than you say).  

Hell, I can pull a drive out of any NT server or workstation and plug it into any other running system as a secondary drive and get at anything I want. As long as you are logged in as administrator you can take ownership of everything and then change the permissions. I never did use Win2k much so maybe they incorporated filesystem encryption which required a passphrase?  I can't imagine I would have missed that one.

[ December 17, 2001: Message edited by: VoidMain ]

[<Zombie9920>]

I tried everything, I tried to take full ownership, etc.

It simply would not let me into the files because the number I was given after my name didn't match the number that was used to encrypt the files. I even tried to change the numbers in the administrator account to match the ones I was originally using and it still didn't work. I was basically screwed. It really pissed me off badly. I still use NTFS but I learned a lesson, before doing a re-installation/repair installation of Win2K make sure you remove the file permissions and I also learned not to use Outlook Express as an E-Mail client because it automatically opens messages when they are highlighted. Now I always use AV software(and I update Virus Definitions regularly) and I use Outlook 2002(comes with Office XP) as an E-Mail client because it doesn't open a message until you double click it. I don't use Win2K anymore(I use Windows XP Coroporate Edition) but I'm sure that the same file lock out fiasco could happen in XP.

[<Zombie9920>]

Typo ~ Coroporate = Corporate.

[voidmain]

Hmmm, I guess I did miss something.  A quick google search reveals what you say to be true.  I didn't realize Win2k included filesystem encryption.  And yes, I can see where that could be a BIG problem in the event of a hard drive crash, unless you have backups, which of course make encrypting your data pointless, unless of course the backups are encrypted as well.  Well, as much as I would like to I don't think I could add that to my list of reasons why I hate Microsoft.  This would be a problem on any encrypted filesystem in any OS.  It's not good security if it can easily be bypassed.

[<Zombie9920>]

It is a good idea for anybody running Win2K/XP using NTFS to set permissions on files/folder to burn the files/folders off on a CD(before you encrypt them) so if something like this ever happens to you, you will have backups of your files.

[Centurian]

Hey Zombie,

 

quote:Originally posted by <Zombie9920>:
I also learned not to use Outlook Express as an E-Mail client because it automatically opens messages when they are highlighted.

In Outlook Express under 95 and 98 so I would guess Win2k, ME, XP also you can turn off the preview pane by simply going into the view menu and changing the Layout options. Then there will be no more automatic opening of email. I have no idea why MS chose to make the preview pane the default but that single "wonderful" feature has caused millions of people to get virus's that they would not have otherwise gotten.

Later
Centurian

[voidmain]

quote:Originally posted by Centurian:
Then there will be no more automatic opening of email. I have no idea why MS chose to make the preview pane the default but that single "wonderful" feature has caused millions of people to get virus's that they would not have otherwise gotten.

I have the preview pane turned on in KDE mail and have received many messages containing a virus but to this day I have yet to be infected.  And I have no virus software.  Hmmm, how could this be?  

[Foney]

I have win2k and I have yet to get a virus.  Your box is only as good as the person who is administrating it. Don't get me wrong I use linux to, if I had to choose  servers for a company it would be linux cause of the money microsoft charges you. I still prefer 2k to linux though  

[voidmain]

quote:Originally posted by Foney:
I have win2k and I have yet to get a virus.  Your box is only as good as the person who is administrating it. Don't get me wrong I use linux to, if I had to choose  servers for a company it would be linux cause of the money microsoft charges you. I still prefer 2k to linux though              

Consider yourself lucky. In the corporate world, at least those companies that use MS OSs and escpecially if they run Exchange/Outlook scramble every few months to clean up the latest viru that spread faster than they can kill it.  Keeping virus software updated seems not to be very helpful as the virus has done it's deed by the time new DAT files are created.  

And Microsoft isn't the fastest at putting out patches to stop this (because it's a fundamental flaw, not one easily patched). And even when they do put out patches companies running MS products rarely apply them company wide.  They would rather scramble like chickens with their heads cut off.  

What really amazes me is that someone hasn't exploited the little email thing to do some *serious* damage which could have happened with no more effort than they already expended.  The last one to go around for certain software packages (such as zonealarm) and deleted it if it found it.  It could have just as easily done some *serious* damage.  

If it were me, I would send a virus out to remove Outlook and install a better (non-MS) email package so these email viru would stop.  It would save the MS shops a lot of work and it would save the rest of the world a lot of network bandwidth.

Hey wait a minute... Maybe this email problem was implemented by MS on purpose.  Yeah, I think they call it ".NET", or "Hailstorm" or something like that...

[ December 17, 2001: Message edited by: VoidMain ]

[jtpenrod]

Thanks VoidMain for the heads-up on that. I was going by what Steve Ballmer said in an interview. If you can't trust a honcho like Ballmer, then who can you trust?      

[Foney]

quote:Originally posted by VoidMain:


And Microsoft isn't the fastest at putting out patches to stop this (because it's a fundamental flaw, not one easily patched). And even when they do put out patches companies running MS products rarely apply them company wide.  They would rather scramble like chickens with their heads cut off.  


[ December 17, 2001: Message edited by: VoidMain ]

Well never in my experince has a patch for microsoft taken any longer to release then a patch for any other OS.  As for the companys running Ms rarely apply patches, goes back to the statement that your OS is only as good as the person running it.

[Foney]

I still havent seen a good arguement on why *nix is better than NT/2k.  :confused:

[voidmain]

quote:Originally posted by Foney:
I still havent seen a good arguement on why *nix is better than NT/2k.   :confused:  

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink (unless you're Bill Gates).