Is google sabotaging browsers?
in [General Linux]
|
From: John Hasler on 7 Mar 2010 10:46 TJ writes: > With Wikipedia, you just don't know. It's a good place to start some > research, but anything, and I do mean ANYTHING you see there needs to > be confirmed from independent sources before you accept it as true. The same is true of Britannica. The difference is that 1) The latter's errors are not corrected promptly (if at all), 2) It does not provide the numerous links to primary sources that Wikipedia does, and 3) The articles are written by supposed experts (selected by the editors, who are not experts) and so they are taken as authoritative. Wikipedia also has features such as the "talk" page for each article where you can discuss it and post your criticisms, and access to the change history for each article. The fact is that Wikipedia has as good or better a record of accuracy than Britannica (and, IMHO, much better when you throw out fluff such as sports and celebrity biographies). -- John Hasler jhasler(a)newsguy.com Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA
From: John Hasler on 7 Mar 2010 10:48 Michael writes: > I never said "Selinux". SELinux was originally distributed by NSA as a patch to the kernel. Thus the assumption that you meant SELinux. -- John Hasler jhasler(a)newsguy.com Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA
From: Grant Edwards on 7 Mar 2010 10:53 On 2010-03-07, notbob <notbob(a)nothome.com> wrote: > On 2010-03-07, Grant Edwards <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >> On 2010-03-07, notbob <notbob(a)nothome.com> wrote: > >>> That's a pretty provocative statement, Grant. >> >> No it's not. Did you read the SE Linux documentation to which I >> provided a link? > > Not all, but I get the gist. > >>> Not being any kinda *nix guru, I'm confused. Lord knows there's a >>> lot of reasons to not trust the govt, but what do you mean? > >> The purpose of the SE Linux patches is to make the kernel more >> paranoid -- to make it far less trusting. > > You make it sound like this is a bad thing. No, I don't. > One of the primary reasons I made the decision to commit to linux is > paranoia and security. And SE Linux is about making Linux _more_ paraniod and secure, not about elminating paranoia from the kernel. >> Traditionally, Unix had a very "trusting" security model. > > C'mon.... your talking 40 yrs ago. Time does not stand still. > >> .....It allows very fine-grained restrictions on who can do what. > > I was under the impression that was the whole point of *nix'es. No. The Unix security model has never been very fine-grained compared to other OSes. >> Tradionally, anybody who needed to do admon stuff was allowed root >> privleges that allowed them to do absolutely anything. With SE Linux >> Linux you can set up much more "paranoid" settings so that the person >> in charge of the printer queues can't do anything except mess with the >> printer queues. > > I don't know the particulars, but uber control is what I want, no > matter how amateurish I may be at it. Do I misunderstand what you > mean by "paranoid"? No. > Again, how is this a bad thing? Never said it was. What I said was SE Linux _increases_ the kernel's paranoia not eliminates it. > Does selinux restrict even admin control. Yes. -- Grant
From: Grant Edwards on 7 Mar 2010 10:55 On 2010-03-07, notbob <notbob(a)nothome.com> wrote: > On 2010-03-07, Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet(a)wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> wrote: > > >> "Unfortunately, existing mainstream operating systems lack the critical >> security feature required for enforcing separation: mandatory access >> control. As a consequence, application security mechanisms are >> vulnerable to tampering and bypass, and malicious or flawed applications >> can easily cause failures in system security." > > OK. > > Sounds like PAM, to me. Again, if this is open source, why is this a > bad thing? Now you're just trolling. -- Grant
From: Vwake on 7 Mar 2010 11:58
On Mar 6, 2010 (Sat) at 6:05pm -0600 (GMT) John Hasler wrote: > Michael writes: >> ...and I first soldered 39 years ago. > > I first soldered about 55 years ago. Dude, how old are you? Or are you just kidding? :) V. |