Mr. Olsen:
I'm sorry you don't like the new look. Me personally, do like it more
than the old one. Furthermore, it's more familiar to a newbie user
coming directly from MS Windows to ReactOS, which is something good in
itself. However, I believe you can always change the particular aspect
thru the INI files
As for your "don't care" for boot time... well, actually you should,
each of us should care about booting times of our OS's, and ReactOS's
developers in particular even more!!! an OS should boot as fast as
posible without compromising it's security or reliability nor doing
quick and dirty hacks, that's for sure. Nonetheless, 4 seconds is
AWESOME!!! GREAT WORK ALEX!!!
I feel so excited I'm about to put my MP3 of "Dragostea din tei"
(a.k.a. "Maya-hi" or "numa iei" by some people) just to feel closer to
Romania and somehow cheer you telepathically ;-)
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 19:06:37 +0100
> From: "Magnus Olsen" <magnus(a)itkonsult-olsen.com>
> Subject: Re: [ros-general] Re: Freeldr UI modifications
> To: "ReactOS General List" <ros-general(a)reactos.org>
> Message-ID: <006601c5ead8$7ce14220$6800a8c0@greatlor6xtkb5>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> Hi, I do not like the design at all, I do not care if it take 4 sec or
> curent time it takes.
>
<hi>
1 http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemu/download.html
at this page i've seen some images to linux/freedos/so on images
i think, itz good idea to put there a link to
http://reactos.org/download/qemu-image-laststable.tar.gz
or something like that
it will help to promote!
cheers..
2 and one more suggestion - to define responsible people for different
field of the project
for xample - i'd like to help with translation, but i dont have any
idea who can i post to!
also - i'm a designer
but i do not know who can i post to, for getting any info, and/or
any work..
so, having project coordinators/sub-coordinators - would be good, useful and
productive!
thanx for any feedback to this post!
</hi>
--
подпись ;)
//origin: От великого до смешного примерно такое же расстояние, как от исторической личности до анекдотической фигуры.
.:[TEAM-HQ:xTalmud] / [TEAM:GsO] / [TEAM-HQ:appoloWT]:.
...я, и мои братья, танцующие на кончике иглы | hELLO.com | .mambo
Firefox is a blocker for the 0.3.0 release, so I started working on getting
it running some time ago. Although I'm not making progress as fast as I'd
hoped (Firefox is a bitch to debug), there definitely is progress. You can
see current state of affairs on the screenshot at
http://www.reactos.nl/pics/ff3.png (125Kb). Problems recently fixed:
- Menu dropdowns are shown now
- Icons on the toolbar are properly shown (work done by Blight)
- Menus don't only show, but actually work
- When opening a web page, the menu bar would be totally blacked out. This
has been fixed.
- Stability improved
What still needs work:
- The installer reportedly doesn't work
- Sometimes you need to wiggle around the mouse a little bit to get the page
to render
If you want to try it out for yourself, get r19269 (or later). Copy
"C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox" and all its subdirectories from a Windows
installation to your ReactOS disk, then start firefox.exe in that directory.
Gé van Geldorp.
You've already given out your IP : 71.48.103.59 - NEW JERSEY, FLEMINGTON,
SPRINT DSL NETWORK
And, by the looks of it, it's come from a private IP address : 192.168.1.2,
which means your machine isn't directly connected to the internet. I would
say your using either a proxy, or some form of NAT/PAT.
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Campbell [mailto:eek2121@comcast.net]
Sent: 16 November 2005 00:51
To: ReactOS General List
Subject: Re: [ros-general] Re: TDI-Based Open Source Personal Firewall
I'll give ya an ip if you'd like :)
Alex Ionescu wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> While I agree with your general statement (I don't run an
> antivirus/firewall myself for the same reasons), your argument and
> reasoning is flawed. You are assuming that all exploits that exist are
> patched. They are not. In fact, if you're running Windows XP patched
> with the latest available updates and have your RPC port open (you
> probably do), I can crack your machine -right now-. Without a firewall
> nothing will stop my exploit packet from reaching you; there is no
> published vulnerability for this bug. Do you use IE? I know of 4
> unpatched bugs still in IE6 today that aren't "in the wild". One of
> them can be used to crack your system after going on a web-page. Once
> again, without a firewall, you'll get infected (even with one you
> will, but the payload wouldn't be able to do anything).
>
> Best regards,
> Alex Ionescu
>
> Richard Campbell wrote:
>
>> That's your opinion.
>>
>> Do you know that on this box i've never run a firewall or a virus
>> scanner? Occasionally i'll run a web based scanner to check
>> suspicious files, etc. but i've never found need for a firewall/virus
>> scanner. As long as you stay up to date and don't run questionable
>> files you are fine. A firewall is not NEEDED as long as the OS is
>> properly configured and working.
>>
>> Richard
>>
>>
>> Ged Murphy wrote:
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ros-general mailing list
> ros-general(a)reactos.org
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-general
>
_______________________________________________
ros-general mailing list
ros-general(a)reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-general
************************************************************************
The information contained in this message or any of its
attachments is confidential and is intended for the exclusive
use of the addressee. The information may also be legally
privileged. The views expressed may not be company policy,
but the personal views of the originator. If you are not the
addressee, any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other
dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please contact
postmaster(a)exideuk.co.uk
<mailto:postmaster@exideuk.co.uk> and then delete this message.
Exide Technologies is an industrial and transportation battery
producer and recycler with operations in 89 countries.
Further information can be found at www.exide.com
I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous, I can assure you that a firewall is
needed.
I work in computer security, so I'm pretty sure I know how to set up a
network securely.
I run, amongst other things, gateway FW, AV, IDS, vunl + rootkit scanners,
and I don't even have any network services switched on (apart from a
honeypot in a DMZ at times for fun)
I think the statistics for hooking up an unprotected Windows machine to the
internet are something like 10 minutes before it becomes infected.
I think I understand the angle your looking at, if you don't run any
services then effectively nothing can exploit you, but his is just not true.
Consider you pick up a 0 day via your web browser. This in turn loads
software which contacts an IRC botnet, installing a trojan turning your
machine into a zombie. That zombie can now send out whatever data it wants
unchecked by an outbound checking firewall. The fact you don't use an AV
means it'll probably never be picked up unless you notice traffic
congestion, or happen to see it in via 'netstat -a'.
This is just one scenario out of thousands.
What if you actually wanted to run some services. ROS will one day be used
in this manner, whether it be for web and mail servers or something else, it
will certainly need a firewall to control traffic.
If firewalls aren't needed, why does nearly everyone use them, and why is
Cisco's PIX so popular?
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Campbell [mailto:eek2121@comcast.net]
Sent: 15 November 2005 01:31
To: ReactOS General List
Subject: Re: [ros-general] Re: TDI-Based Open Source Personal Firewall
That's your opinion.
Do you know that on this box i've never run a firewall or a virus
scanner? Occasionally i'll run a web based scanner to check suspicious
files, etc. but i've never found need for a firewall/virus scanner. As
long as you stay up to date and don't run questionable files you are
fine. A firewall is not NEEDED as long as the OS is properly configured
and working.
Richard
************************************************************************
The information contained in this message or any of its
attachments is confidential and is intended for the exclusive
use of the addressee. The information may also be legally
privileged. The views expressed may not be company policy,
but the personal views of the originator. If you are not the
addressee, any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other
dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please contact
postmaster(a)exideuk.co.uk
<mailto:postmaster@exideuk.co.uk> and then delete this message.
Exide Technologies is an industrial and transportation battery
producer and recycler with operations in 89 countries.
Further information can be found at www.exide.com
>
> I've thought occasionally, since the MS Win[9N][xT] TCP/IP
> stack is based on
> the *BSD one, that it should be possible to adapt the OpenBSD
> firewall/s to
> the MS Win-compatible TCP/IP stack. I thought of it when my
> Mum's MS Win05
> box went online, but haven't had the time to do anything about it.
>
> What do people think?
IIRC, the NT stack is not based on the BSD one. It has been completley
rewritten from scratch.
Windows firewalls can be implemented in a few different ways. There is a
winsock hook, which is quite frankly laughable in terms of security, there
are several other means of hooking into the TDI and NDIS. There is also an
ip filter driver which was introduced in Windows 2000 (but dropped there
after).
There is then the more secure, but more complex methods of writing kernel
level drivers either sandwiched between NDIS as an intermediate driver, or
implementing the new windows technology of Windows Filter Platform / Winsock
Kernel which Alex Ionescu has brought to my attention recently.
None of the above methods can be derived directly from the BSD
implementation.
************************************************************************
The information contained in this message or any of its
attachments is confidential and is intended for the exclusive
use of the addressee. The information may also be legally
privileged. The views expressed may not be company policy,
but the personal views of the originator. If you are not the
addressee, any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other
dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please contact
postmaster(a)exideuk.co.uk
<mailto:postmaster@exideuk.co.uk> and then delete this message.
Exide Technologies is an industrial and transportation battery
producer and recycler with operations in 89 countries.
Further information can be found at www.exide.com
Current thoughts are either an an intermediate NDIS driver, or implementing
WFP / WSK.
Either way they will both operate at the lower end of the network stack for
maximum security.
-----Original Message-----
From: crashfourit [mailto:crashfourit@gmail.com]
Sent: 15 November 2005 02:46
To: ReactOS General List
Subject: Re: [ros-general] Re: TDI-Based Open Source Personal Firewall
I would say that the firewall needs to be integrated with the TCP/IP stack
and the network API. This could give better protection for the end user,
but it could come with a curse. To do this, we would need to make sure that
eliminate, as much as possible, the possibility of double free and buffer
overflow attacks. Also, there need to be an option to log were all the
traffic is coming from or going to. In addition, it needs filter, including
incoming traffic, outgoing traffic. Also, it need to be able to destignuish
between trusted addapters and non-trusted addapter with various levels
between them. It would also be nice to have the option to filter out most
everything when the screensaver is on or after a certain user inactivity
period.
Michael B. Trausch wrote:
Richard Campbell wrote:
That's your opinion.
Do you know that on this box i've never run a firewall or a virus
scanner? Occasionally i'll run a web based scanner to check suspicious
files, etc. but i've never found need for a firewall/virus scanner. As
long as you stay up to date and don't run questionable files you are
fine. A firewall is not NEEDED as long as the OS is properly configured
and working.
Richard
Many users of Windows like things that "just work." That includes virus
protection and the like. While I shy away from questionable files and
practices, sometimes prohibitively so, I retain a current, updated virus
scanner on my machine, "just in case." People I work with aren't always
as careful as I am, and I've found one or two (relatively harmless)
things that way. It doesn't bother me much, but it is nice to have.
Nobody's perfect.
As far as a firewall... I don't like software firewalls, but many do.
They like their functionality to block things and whatnot.
Also, people just aren't careful. They don't care. They click away,
and everything else. That's 70%, if not more, of the computer users
that you have out there. If those people aren't protected out of the
box, odds are they won't be -- and that puts the rest of us at risk,
especially if they get something that can do nasty bandwidth hogging things.
When you're talking about "real" end-users, firewalls and virus software
are a must. They are there to prevent the Internet from falling apart,
in many ways, and while I don't like the fact that they are necessary at
all, they are, and that's a result of the world we live in.
- Mike
_____
_______________________________________________
ros-general mailing list
ros-general(a)reactos.org <mailto:ros-general@reactos.org>
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-general
<http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-general>
************************************************************************
The information contained in this message or any of its
attachments is confidential and is intended for the exclusive
use of the addressee. The information may also be legally
privileged. The views expressed may not be company policy,
but the personal views of the originator. If you are not the
addressee, any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other
dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please contact
postmaster(a)exideuk.co.uk
<mailto:postmaster@exideuk.co.uk> and then delete this message.
Exide Technologies is an industrial and transportation battery
producer and recycler with operations in 89 countries.
Further information can be found at www.exide.com
I'd like to get ReactOS up and running on my Debian Linux box, so I can try
it out. I would like to install it on a second hard drive, and boot to it
using Grub, which I already use with Debian. I'm not sure how to do this.
Can I choose which hard drive I install ReactOS to when I am installing from
the ReactOS CD? If not, how do I install to the slave drive and not the
master? Will installing to the slave drive cause me problems with Grub? Will
I need to do some configuring of Grub to get ReacOS to boot from the second
hard drive?
I'm just looking for the basic procedure I need to follow. I can do some
digging on the net for the ugly details. I'm not sure where to start with
this, or if it will even work.
Thanks,
Scott Huey
Understanding and Replacing Microsoft Exchange
by Tom Adelstein
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6368
I've downloaded it in connection with something entirely different (shades of
Monty Python! ;) and discoverred this article.
So, we've got some network functionality already, we've got a NetBEUI in the
form of Sambs-NG, we've got most of the specialized stuff already out there.
We've just got to get it all fitting together. (famous last words ;)
Wesley Parish
--
Clinersterton beademung, with all of love - RIP James Blish
-----
Mau e ki, he aha te mea nui?
You ask, what is the most important thing?
Maku e ki, he tangata, he tangata, he tangata.
I reply, it is people, it is people, it is people.