Linux Bulletproof ? Better read this if you think so.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jasper
  • Start date Start date
"Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message
news:jsednZWT5I10x6rVnZ2dnUVZ_tninZ2d@giganews.com...
> On Fri, 23 May 2008 13:25:57 -0600, Jasper wrote:
>
>> http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=11869
>
>
> *yawn*
>
> Installed the patches for the flaw days ago already...
>
> --
> Stephan
> 1986 Pontiac Fiero GT
> 1992 Suzuki Kan-o-tuna ('till I can get my R1)
>
> å›ã®äº‹æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
> å›ã®äº‹å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

*yawn* Windows owns Linux
 
On Fri, 23 May 2008 13:46:58 -0600, Jasper wrote:

> "Gumby" <gumby@is.cool> wrote in message
> news:H4FZj.289605$pM4.48519@pd7urf1no...
>> "Jasper" <Jasper@faraway.ca> wrote in news:em7PfrQvIHA.4876
>> @TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl:
>>
>>> http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=11869
>>
>> Yea, anyone who thinks any OS is secure is a moron.
>
> There is one individual on this NG that has stated this more than once
> that linux is "Bulletproof".

I will admit, it isn't bullet proof.

Just a nice 30:1 better track record.
 
On Fri, 23 May 2008 19:01:45 -0500, Stephan Rose wrote:

> On Fri, 23 May 2008 13:25:57 -0600, Jasper wrote:
>
>> http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=11869
>
>
> *yawn*
>
> Installed the patches for the flaw days ago already...

So did I. And not even affected as I don't have the service on the
Internet from my desktop,

Certainly as faster turn around than those other guys.
 
"Canuck57" <dave8762@nospam-please.com> wrote in message
news:wkJZj.159906$rd2.120931@pd7urf3no...
> On Fri, 23 May 2008 19:01:45 -0500, Stephan Rose wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 23 May 2008 13:25:57 -0600, Jasper wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=11869
>>
>>
>> *yawn*
>>
>> Installed the patches for the flaw days ago already...
>
> So did I. And not even affected as I don't have the service on the
> Internet from my desktop,
>
> Certainly as faster turn around than those other guys.
>

BS.
 
"Canuck57" <dave8762@nospam-please.com> wrote in message
news:riJZj.159904$rd2.94968@pd7urf3no...
> I will admit, it isn't bullet proof.
>
> Just a nice 30:1 better track record.

30:1 for what stats of users trying to actually do the breaking in/breaking?

*****
example:
a group of 10000 people attempt to break "The Joe Company" product
a group of 10 people attempt to break "The Shmoe Company" product.

30 people broke the Joe product
1 broke the Shmoe product..
*****
Cool.
so.
30:1
like you say means Scmoe product is better because less people can break it.
LOL
In actuallity, the 30 had a greater chance to be such a number anyway,
Didn't it?
so Please...
show some real stats so I can actually make up my mind about Windows vs
Linux
:)

What would the ratio be if the amount of people that are trying
to break into MS were the same for Linux?
Do you actually think that Linux is as solid if such occured?
I don't.
Of course that is my opinion and it would kinda be cool to find out such,
if it could ever happen at all.
 
Frank wrote:
> Alias wrote:
>
>> Jasper wrote:
>>
>>> "Gumby" <gumby@is.cool> wrote in message
>>> news:H4FZj.289605$pM4.48519@pd7urf1no...
>>>
>>>> "Jasper" <Jasper@faraway.ca> wrote in news:em7PfrQvIHA.4876
>>>> @TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl:
>>>>
>>>>> http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=11869
>>>>
>>>> Yea, anyone who thinks any OS is secure is a moron.
>>>
>>>
>>> There is one individual on this NG that has stated this more than
>>> once that linux is "Bulletproof".
>>>
>>
>> compared to Windows ... was the entire quote. Care to change your
>> opinion now?
>>
>> Alias
>
> Of course not. And you

> proly
Now what is proly
> have an infected urbuttoo and don't even know it.
> I bet you're a fukkin bot!...LOL!
> Frank
 
"Canuck57" <dave8762@nospam-please.com> wrote in message
news:wkJZj.159906$rd2.120931@pd7urf3no...
> On Fri, 23 May 2008 19:01:45 -0500, Stephan Rose wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 23 May 2008 13:25:57 -0600, Jasper wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=11869
>>
>>
>> *yawn*
>>
>> Installed the patches for the flaw days ago already...
>
> So did I. And not even affected as I don't have the service on the
> Internet from my desktop,

Do you understand the bit about the patch *not* actually fixing the problem?

>
> Certainly as faster turn around than those other guys.

You call two years fast?
The whole thing destroys many myths about Ubuntu..

like "nobody can hide stuff in linux as so many people read the code it
would be found", what found two years later?
and "there are less bugs in linux as so many people read the code the bugs
get found", really?

I doubt if it will stop the lies here though.

It took the reporter long enough to produce the article when the
consequences were obvious to anyone with a bit of computer knowledge as soon
as the bug was announced.
 
dennis@home wrote:
>
>
> "Canuck57" <dave8762@nospam-please.com> wrote in message
> news:wkJZj.159906$rd2.120931@pd7urf3no...
>> On Fri, 23 May 2008 19:01:45 -0500, Stephan Rose wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 23 May 2008 13:25:57 -0600, Jasper wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=11869
>>>
>>>
>>> *yawn*
>>>
>>> Installed the patches for the flaw days ago already...
>>
>> So did I. And not even affected as I don't have the service on the
>> Internet from my desktop,
>
> Do you understand the bit about the patch *not* actually fixing the
> problem?

No, please explain and prove what you say with some credible documentation.

Alias
 
"Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
news:g19o59$1t2$2@aioe.org...
> dennis@home wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Canuck57" <dave8762@nospam-please.com> wrote in message
>> news:wkJZj.159906$rd2.120931@pd7urf3no...
>>> On Fri, 23 May 2008 19:01:45 -0500, Stephan Rose wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 23 May 2008 13:25:57 -0600, Jasper wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=11869
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *yawn*
>>>>
>>>> Installed the patches for the flaw days ago already...
>>>
>>> So did I. And not even affected as I don't have the service on the
>>> Internet from my desktop,
>>
>> Do you understand the bit about the patch *not* actually fixing the
>> problem?
>
> No, please explain and prove what you say with some credible
> documentation.
>
> Alias

Everybody Knows That Ubuntu Is Nothing But Dog Crap On A Stick. Just FYI.
If You Like Dog Crap On A Stick Then You Will Like Ubuntu. Just FYI. Just
Ask My Dad. Just FYI
 
"Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
news:g19o59$1t2$2@aioe.org...
> dennis@home wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Canuck57" <dave8762@nospam-please.com> wrote in message
>> news:wkJZj.159906$rd2.120931@pd7urf3no...
>>> On Fri, 23 May 2008 19:01:45 -0500, Stephan Rose wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 23 May 2008 13:25:57 -0600, Jasper wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=11869
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *yawn*
>>>>
>>>> Installed the patches for the flaw days ago already...
>>>
>>> So did I. And not even affected as I don't have the service on the
>>> Internet from my desktop,
>>
>> Do you understand the bit about the patch *not* actually fixing the
>> problem?
>
> No, please explain and prove what you say with some credible
> documentation.

Do you really want me to show you how stupid you are again?
OK..

All keys generated on all Debian machines have been broken for the last two
years.
Anyone who has trusted a machine that uses these keys is unsafe.
These include all the ubuntu servers and loads of others on the internet.
So if you have trusted an internet site in the last two years you may have
been compromised.
Now go and reinstall your Ubuntu again as you obviously don't know enough to
know if you have a problem.
 
dennis@home wrote:
>
>
> "Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
> news:g19o59$1t2$2@aioe.org...
>> dennis@home wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Canuck57" <dave8762@nospam-please.com> wrote in message
>>> news:wkJZj.159906$rd2.120931@pd7urf3no...
>>>> On Fri, 23 May 2008 19:01:45 -0500, Stephan Rose wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 23 May 2008 13:25:57 -0600, Jasper wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=11869
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *yawn*
>>>>>
>>>>> Installed the patches for the flaw days ago already...
>>>>
>>>> So did I. And not even affected as I don't have the service on the
>>>> Internet from my desktop,
>>>
>>> Do you understand the bit about the patch *not* actually fixing the
>>> problem?
>>
>> No, please explain and prove what you say with some credible
>> documentation.
>
> Do you really want me to show you how stupid you are again?
> OK..
>
> All keys generated on all Debian machines have been broken for the last
> two years.
> Anyone who has trusted a machine that uses these keys is unsafe.
> These include all the ubuntu servers and loads of others on the internet.
> So if you have trusted an internet site in the last two years you may
> have been compromised.
> Now go and reinstall your Ubuntu again as you obviously don't know
> enough to know if you have a problem.

No explanation of why the patch didn't fix it and, of course, no
credible documentation, only "I'm smarter and more knowledgeable than you".

Alias
 
"Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
news:g1aarl$bs9$1@aioe.org...

> No explanation of why the patch didn't fix it and, of course, no credible
> documentation, only "I'm smarter and more knowledgeable than you".

I think you have proven everyone in this group fits that description.
 
dennis@home wrote:
>
>
> "Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
> news:g1aarl$bs9$1@aioe.org...
>
>> No explanation of why the patch didn't fix it and, of course, no
>> credible documentation, only "I'm smarter and more knowledgeable than
>> you".
>
> I think you have proven everyone in this group fits that description.
>

I don't need a repeat performance from you Dennis, but proof, something
you obviously can't provide.

Alias
 
"Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
news:g1bdh0$3qh$2@aioe.org...
> dennis@home wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:g1aarl$bs9$1@aioe.org...
>>
>>> No explanation of why the patch didn't fix it and, of course, no
>>> credible documentation, only "I'm smarter and more knowledgeable than
>>> you".
>>
>> I think you have proven everyone in this group fits that description.
>>
>
> I don't need a repeat performance from you Dennis, but proof, something
> you obviously can't provide.

It's obvious to anyone that knows anything about computer security and you
/have/ been pointed to documentation, but you just prove what I said..
Either too stupid or just plain malicious.
Either way makes you a waste of space for everyone else when it comes to
computers.
Even the Ubuntu crowd think you are stupid.
c.o.l.a would be the best place for you, it is full of people as stupid as
you.
 
dennis@home wrote:
>
>
> "Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
> news:g1bdh0$3qh$2@aioe.org...
>> dennis@home wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:g1aarl$bs9$1@aioe.org...
>>>
>>>> No explanation of why the patch didn't fix it and, of course, no
>>>> credible documentation, only "I'm smarter and more knowledgeable
>>>> than you".
>>>
>>> I think you have proven everyone in this group fits that description.
>>>
>>
>> I don't need a repeat performance from you Dennis, but proof,
>> something you obviously can't provide.
>
> It's obvious to anyone that knows anything about computer security and
> you /have/ been pointed to documentation, but you just prove what I said..
> Either too stupid or just plain malicious.
> Either way makes you a waste of space for everyone else when it comes to
> computers.
> Even the Ubuntu crowd think you are stupid.
> c.o.l.a would be the best place for you, it is full of people as stupid
> as you.

So what does Dennis do? He repeats himself and, again, only provides
unfounded lies and no proof for his assertions.

Alias
 
Alias wrote:
> dennis@home wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Canuck57" <dave8762@nospam-please.com> wrote in message
>> news:wkJZj.159906$rd2.120931@pd7urf3no...
>>> On Fri, 23 May 2008 19:01:45 -0500, Stephan Rose wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 23 May 2008 13:25:57 -0600, Jasper wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=11869
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *yawn*
>>>>
>>>> Installed the patches for the flaw days ago already...
>>>
>>> So did I. And not even affected as I don't have the service on the
>>> Internet from my desktop,
>>
>> Do you understand the bit about the patch *not* actually fixing the
>> problem?
>
> No, please explain and prove what you say with some credible documentation.
>
> Alias

We're still awaiting the proof of millions dumping Windows for Ubuntu you've stated. Do you
think that if it were the case something like "Ubuntu Now 2.5 Downloads +" would be stated
on their web page, on their home page. Let us investigate for you, rather than wait for you
to do so, back in 5 min off to http://www.ubuntu.com/ ......

.... back.

Nah....! Not unless, no forbid that would never be the case, the Ubuntu website is not
credible documentation. Guess the background colour of their website is to match that colour
of what comes out their advocates mouths.

I can remember the Mozilla Firefox website once stating something like "Over 2 million
downloads", can't remember the specific number. That is what happens when a competitor to
MS, whatever the product, blasts for the whole world to see when they get the millions of
downloads.

You bring much humour and joy to the world Alias, keep it up.


- GorkusPuss
 
GorkusPuss wrote:
> Alias wrote:
>> dennis@home wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Canuck57" <dave8762@nospam-please.com> wrote in message
>>> news:wkJZj.159906$rd2.120931@pd7urf3no...
>>>> On Fri, 23 May 2008 19:01:45 -0500, Stephan Rose wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 23 May 2008 13:25:57 -0600, Jasper wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=11869
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *yawn*
>>>>>
>>>>> Installed the patches for the flaw days ago already...
>>>>
>>>> So did I. And not even affected as I don't have the service on the
>>>> Internet from my desktop,
>>>
>>> Do you understand the bit about the patch *not* actually fixing the
>>> problem?
>>
>> No, please explain and prove what you say with some credible
>> documentation.
>>
>> Alias
>
> We're still awaiting the proof of millions dumping Windows for Ubuntu
> you've stated. Do you think that if it were the case something like
> "Ubuntu Now 2.5 Downloads +" would be stated on their web page, on their
> home page. Let us investigate for you, rather than wait for you to do
> so, back in 5 min off to http://www.ubuntu.com/ ......
>
> ... back.
>
> Nah....! Not unless, no forbid that would never be the case, the Ubuntu
> website is not credible documentation. Guess the background colour of
> their website is to match that colour of what comes out their advocates
> mouths.
>
> I can remember the Mozilla Firefox website once stating something like
> "Over 2 million downloads", can't remember the specific number. That is
> what happens when a competitor to MS, whatever the product, blasts for
> the whole world to see when they get the millions of downloads.
>
> You bring much humour and joy to the world Alias, keep it up.
>
>
> - GorkusPuss

Another fanboy who can only insult, trot out a straw man and offer no
proof. Ho hum.

Alias
 
Alias wrote:
> GorkusPuss wrote:
>>
>> We're still awaiting the proof of millions dumping Windows for Ubuntu
>> you've stated. Do you think that if it were the case something like
>> "Ubuntu Now 2.5 Downloads +" would be stated on their web page, on
>> their home page. Let us investigate for you, rather than wait for you
>> to do so, back in 5 min off to http://www.ubuntu.com/ ......
>>
>> ... back.
>>
>> Nah....! Not unless, no forbid that would never be the case, the
>> Ubuntu website is not credible documentation. Guess the background
>> colour of their website is to match that colour of what comes out
>> their advocates mouths.
>>
>> I can remember the Mozilla Firefox website once stating something like
>> "Over 2 million downloads", can't remember the specific number. That
>> is what happens when a competitor to MS, whatever the product, blasts
>> for the whole world to see when they get the millions of downloads.
>>
>> You bring much humour and joy to the world Alias, keep it up.
>>
>>
>> - GorkusPuss
>
> Another fanboy who can only insult, trot out a straw man and offer no
> proof. Ho hum.
>
> Alias

Oh poor pooh pooh Alias still no proof, still can't muster anything other than the loser
squeal. Please mark future posts as OT as they are in reference to your Oedipal situation,
I'm not your mummy, cry your Ubuntu junk elsewhere.

- GorkusPuss
 
Back
Top