What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Adam Lambert sings the 2012 theme song, “Time for Miracles” view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - Watch the Adam Lambert music video for the 2012 theme song. See 2012, in theaters Nov 13
137 Comments
- debuggercll, on 05/11/2008, -12/+102My ass: It's only secure because no one uses it.
- Corgy, on 05/11/2008, -13/+97If you're running the 2.6 kernel, guess what? You have this security right now.
- spikeyone, on 05/11/2008, -14/+83"It's only secure because no one uses it" my ass.
- trogdoor, on 05/11/2008, -3/+47"Public networks like the Internet are dangerous places. Anyone who has a computer attached to the Internet (even transiently) understands these dangers."
If only that were true - foxtwofoxtwo, on 05/11/2008, -0/+42It's a Linux related story; it's practically troll-bait to begin with. People don't like what they don't understand and that dislike is magnified by the anonymity of the internet.
- jus1haz2, on 05/11/2008, -3/+45It is open source.
- oneredeye, on 05/11/2008, -2/+45What's with all the troll comments?
- ekravchenko, on 05/11/2008, -3/+41That's what the article said. I don't know why you are being dugg down
- cabazorro, on 05/11/2008, -3/+40Idiocy begets idiocy:
Idiot: Government? Must have some back door.
kernel maintainer: Here's the code, look at it and tell me.
Idiot: Er .. you cannot tell? Come on! is the NSA.
kernel maintainer: I'm looking at it right now, not only me, but hundred of developers around the world. Do you understand that?
Idiot: Is the government man! You can't trust them!
kernel maintainer: So what are you running anyway?
Idiot: I'm running Vista. - cyrix, on 05/11/2008, -7/+35Is that you Ballmer?
- debuggercll, on 05/11/2008, -3/+28He's making a statement about the NSA, not Linux.
- jus1haz2, on 05/11/2008, -3/+27Well aren't you special.
- doctorfungi, on 05/11/2008, -1/+24If I had my way it would be your last too.
- SonnyW, on 05/11/2008, -0/+23It's because digg is becoming more and more like youtube, every single day.
- dinostabOMG, on 05/11/2008, -2/+25FTA: "Anyone who has a computer attached to the Internet (even transiently) understands these dangers."
Aaaaahahahahaha - ToadLeg, on 05/11/2008, -3/+26That may make sense in the Hollywood world of 3D operating systems and 5 keystrokes to hack the Pentagon, but if you knew anything about open source you would know that's nonsense. There are many people in the world who can read the source code to a program and understand what it does. If a program designed to create a layer of security had any code in it that did not help achieve that goal, it would be very obvious.
- yingjai, on 05/11/2008, -0/+20no idea what you just said
- ofenza, on 05/11/2008, -2/+19look, a pyramid.
- jb0nd38372, on 05/11/2008, -4/+20I decided to Digg you both up, apparently you guys are the most intellegent posters thus far.
- foxtwofoxtwo, on 05/11/2008, -2/+18I don't know when you tried it and quit, but Linux has come a looooong way. I tried ubuntu a couple years ago and didn't like it at the time. Now I have it as the only operating system on my laptop.
Just something to think about. - Protoss, on 05/11/2008, -1/+17In open source software? Sure, but it wouldn't be smart seeing as before anything gets put into the mainstream kernel, it's read through, line by line, to make sure there are no backdoors or exploits.
- DigitalPioneer, on 05/11/2008, -2/+16jus1haz2 has a good point: how do you put a backdoor in open source software? It might be the world's most difficult to find, but it'll also be the world's most exploited.
- Eezyville, on 05/11/2008, -6/+20Huh?
- t0x2c, on 05/11/2008, -4/+21I did what you see there.
- noerrorsfound, on 05/11/2008, -3/+17What you did--it's there, and I see it.
- AzureRise, on 05/11/2008, -0/+13The NSA has stated that what really makes Linux insecure is those non open binary drivers, like the ones you get from Nvidia for example.
- nxsty, on 05/11/2008, -0/+12How could SELinux contain backdoors, when it's open source and the code has to be reviewed on public mailing list before it's merged?
- expert01, on 05/11/2008, -0/+11When it's 36 comments and 1 digg on the front page... then you can bitch.
- dafragsta, on 05/11/2008, -0/+11Look at it this way. If that's true, then you can count on pretty much every single operating system under the sun having the same back door. At least this is hardened against your garden variety hacker and script kiddie.
- finanigan, on 05/11/2008, -1/+12Red Hat has done a lot of good work to make SELinux easier to configure and use. If anyone thinks that SELinux is too difficult and hasn't tried it in a while, I'd recommend you grab a copy of CentOS and start playing. There's great documentation at http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL ...
- inactive, on 05/11/2008, -0/+10There are doors that lock
And doors that don't
There are doors that let you in
And out
But never open
But there are trapdoors
That you can't come back from. - jmknsd, on 05/11/2008, -1/+10because it is a long article and the type of person who is interested in this stuff might actually read the article before posting a comment.
- Kr0ntab, on 05/11/2008, -0/+9There's no back doors built into the SE-Linux components that have ever been discovered. The source code is completely open and available for public scrutiny, and the NSA has a vested interest in the SE-Linux initiative, namely code they can trust and completely customize to meet their needs. Besides, there's a million low-tech ways for the NSA to accomplish "other" objectives. :-)
To answer your question though, Novell heads up a project called "AppArmor" which similarly compartmentalizes processes using easy to understand templates. There is much debate over which is more secure, but generally speaking, most security processionals agree that SE-Linux type-enforcement has some inherent advantages. Either method, however, greatly reduces a systems attack surface. - euvirtual, on 05/11/2008, -0/+7You know, just because cabazorro's post was written after yours doesn't mean it was a response to your post (or anyone else for that matter, although I suspect it was directed at freze's comment, just above yours).
- inactive, on 05/11/2008, -0/+6Its adding a second tier of security basically.
The Linux kernel operates in its own space.
The user operates in their own user space.
The 2 never meet unless required by software or the operator.
The Second tier using a Kernel security module adds a third space that controls the Kernel and the user. It effectively removes opportunistic hack attempts and shields the kernel from poor users / software.
Basically its doing the job of double checking the software environment from possible hacks and poor security in third party applications. The "firewall" for the OS is therefore in built and duel layer, it does not need to check the code being run saving the CPU time over a "firewall" solution (I use firewall as a term but its not actually correct). The only time its used is during a Kernel runtime check or call out request and it simply checks the user space security is correct and then allows the code to operate. - oddtom, on 05/11/2008, -0/+7The kernel is loaded with goto statements. They're only a problem if used incorrectly. (PS: Your correction requires braces.)
- inactive, on 05/11/2008, -1/+8The funny thing is, Vista did leave a back door. It was to enable police to quickly bypass security and access files on other people computers. The tool they use is called COFEE. http://www.engadget.com/2008/04/29/microsoft-gives ...
- init100, on 05/11/2008, -1/+7Unless it is disabled, and many Linux distributors unfortunately disable SELinux.
- init100, on 05/11/2008, -0/+5If you want to try SELinux, use Fedora or CentOS. They have had SELinux for a long time, and the implementation is pretty mature.
- euvirtual, on 05/11/2008, -1/+6Even if it had backdoors, there should be at least one person as paranoid as you that knows how to read the code, and would have warned everybody by now. It is open source after all, so if no one found a backdoor after all this time, you should be safe.
- itech7, on 05/11/2008, -0/+4huh.... there was an attempt to create a Linux virus which exploited a kernel bug some around in 1996 .... it was fixed ... till date .... not a single Linux virus exists for the exception above.
- expert01, on 05/11/2008, -6/+10Your thoughts don't count.
- ofenza, on 05/11/2008, -1/+5watched Amadeus last night too.
- EvansHall, on 05/11/2008, -4/+9I like totally understand what this article is talking about.
/sarcasm - danjwray, on 05/11/2008, -0/+4Did you mean *Maximum* 24 hour old detection set?
- MattBD, on 05/11/2008, -0/+4Don't tell Google that, their servers all run Linux, not to mention loads of consumer electronics, a huge proportion of the world's supercomputers as well as the desktop users (who may possibly outnumber Mac users, though it's harder to tell with Linux how many people are using it)
- mossblaser, on 05/11/2008, -0/+4Ah hello mark078h! I'd like you to meet a good friend of mine;
mark078h, block list, block list, mark078h. - Protoss, on 05/11/2008, -0/+4Have you read the comments lately?
- MoNaRkyRuLeS, on 05/11/2008, -1/+6App Armour is much easier to use than any of them using the same framework principles. Where can you get it? In about any version of SuSE or Ubuntu Linux. It comes pre-installed. Learns your surfing habits and your done!
Whereas Microsoft controls your control of Vista Security to benefit them!!! So ...oops who's that coming in the backdoor??? Oh NOes.........!!! Relax people! ....it's just us, M$ fiddling with your personal data for Marketing and Advertisement Benefits (now that we're using Proxy Attacks to gain Control of Yahoo)!!! NOW, just go back to sleep all you dumbass consumers and STFU!!!! LOLz - glinsvad, on 05/11/2008, -0/+4http://www.xkcd.org/292/
-
Show 51 - 100 of 139 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is