Arrogance Amongst Certain Linux Users
In this blog post I am going to talk about something that has been a pet peeve of mine for a long time about several people in the Linux community. I want to be clear, I am not anti-opensource (I make use of open-source software every day), nor am I anti-Linux (I am both a Windows and Linux administrator myself and really like Linux on my phone (Android).
Many times, I have read and responded to various Linux users online who have come off as arrogant and think they know everything about operating systems “just because they use Linux”. Of course, I do not claim to know everything about operating systems myself (there are many more people who know more than I do).
This blog post is not meant to be an attack against Linux users (because, of course, not all Linux users are this way). I am just sharing one of many not-so-great experiences I have had with various people who have used Linux.
Summery of what happened:
- A while back, I made a comment on a tech website. In a nutshell, I said “using Linux did not mean that you are completely secure from malware infesting your Linux box”. This is a valid statement. I did not bash or hate on Linux. I enjoy using Linux.
- Someone posted a reply to my comment, saying that I had made several wrong points about Linux. He claimed that I said “Windows malware would work on Linux” and I was wrong for saying that.
- I responded to him, telling him that his first point he said I was “wrong” about was something that I never said.
- I responded – using the bash shell-shocker vulnerability as an example – something being open-source does not mean that it is more secure.
- I also responded asking him to show me the points that I got “wrong”, since he didn’t give any valid points. All were just his opinions or straw-man arguments.
- He responded back and ignored my question and the issue about putting words into my mouth. He just wanted to talk about how Linux is still secure because people “fix vulnerabilities quickly” for Linux. He basically changed the subject.
- He also said the ShellShock vulnerability was fixed within two days.
- I told him that the bash shell-shocker vulnerability was in fact not completely fixed in two days. It took a little bit longer.
- Now the guy does not respond back.
The bug did not have an official fix until 24 September 2014 (the date when the fix was released to the public). The fix came out almost two weeks after the initial discovery.
Now of course I don’t hate the guy, but what he did was just another example of the problems I have encountered with the Linux community.
He started a technical discussion about a comment I made to someone else 3+ months ago, claimed I said things I didn’t say, and presented his personal opinions as verified facts. When he was confronted with evidence to the contrariety, he decided to “sneak out” and not reply anymore.
I know there are good people in the Linux community, but situations like this make me wonder. Also, other people who may be considering Linux will see various attitudes like this and be turned off by that alone. Not a good way to gain users in my opinion.
Posted in Computers, Internet and Servers, Operating Systems, Society, Software
Do You Really Need to Use Antivirus Software?
More and more people are starting to do away with anti-virus software because “they don’t need it”. Well I personally see anti-virus software as a tool…a tool that helps secure a computer system. When someone says that they “don’t need anti-virus software”, I think of the example that I gave to someone a while back on the Internet :
Let’s say you go around telling people that you don’t need to see a doctor to test for cancer, because you do not have cancer, nor will you ever get any. How do you have the potential to know that you do not have cancer, *if* you are not checked by a doctor? How do you know that you will *never* get *any* cancer at all? You don’t!
Your logic would not make sense in that situation because you are assuming something as fact, when *in fact* you are just guessing! The same applies to someone who says that they “don’t need anti-virus software” because they “know that they won’t get any malware” on their computer system or “I know that I am careful, hence I don’t need anti-virus software”. Sorry people but that logic just doesn’t add up!
Also it seems in my experience that many Linux users believe the idea that they won’t get any malware on their Linux systems, or at the very least they “don’t need an anti-virus” program running on their Linux system.
Like I have asked several times before, how can you have the potential to know if you have malware on your Linux system, if you do not run anti-virus software on your Linux desktop / server?
You are just guessing that you will not get any malware. You are even guessing when you say that you do not have malware currently on your Linux system!
Sure Linux has a lot less malware than Windows, but that is no excuse for ignoring security! 🙂
Also, I know that anti-virus software can have (and does have) security problems in of itself. However keep in mind that the companies that write the anti-virus software do update their software to fix security problems, so this is not necessarily a big deal (depends upon your situation).
Posted in Computers, Internet and Servers, Operating Systems, Software
How Good is pfSense?
Please take note this is not a “how-to” tutorial on installing pfSense. I am just giving my general opinions and experiences with using pfSense.
Install Procedure
The install has two different paths. 1) A quick install, or 2) a more detailed, custom install. I just went ahead and used the quick install. The actual installation took about 3-4 minutes to complete. The process was quick and painless.
Initial Setup
After pfSense installs and reboots, you will have the opportunity to tell pfSense which network card is for your WAN and which network card is for your LAN connections – all basic, routine information a router needs to know.
pfSense will give you the opportunity to setup a VLAN if needed. I had no problems with this part of the setup.
General Router Configuration
You can now access (via a web browser) the newly installed pfSense router using the default local (LAN) IP address pfSense assigned you.
Once in, you will need to modify the router’s basic settings (e.g., WAN settings, LAN settings, etc.). Having your old router configuration with you while setting up your new router helps a lot.
I setup a VPN (using OpenVPN) to my place of work. This has helped a lot in providing a safe and encrypted mechanism to transfer data between home and work.
I also assigned static IP addresses to the different computers at the location.
Powerful Gateway Control
pfSense gives you total control over your firewall’s gateway. For example, let’s say I have the following local networks: 10.x, 11.x, and 12.x Each of these networks are sand-boxed from each other for extra security.
Now let’s say I have computers on the 11.x network that only need to process data locally (e.g., computers that render 3d animated graphics). They have no need to use the Internet at all. All their work is assigned via a local computer.
I can now go to pfSense and tell it not to allow the 11.x network through the Internet gateway. So now I have the 10.x and 12.x networks with Internet, while the 11.x has absolutely no Internet access. This is a very good and effective way to secure important workstations from an outside attack.
I am pretty sure none of the consumer-grade routers you can purchase from your local retailer will have this ability out-of-the-box.
Backup and Restore
pfSense allows you to backup your entire router configuration. You can restore at any time you need to.
Upgrades
pfSense seamlessly upgrades to newer versions, keeping your previous configuration. This is one of the reasons I enjoy using pfSense. No more wasting time fixing configurations due to a system update.
I used to use OpenWRT (a Linux-based router OS) that required a complete reconfiguration, every…single…upgrade (no joke). I about had a heart-attack when I found this out. OpenWRT definitely was not a good fit for me.
Overall Opinion of pfSense
I am very pleased with pfSense. I have had almost zero trouble with it. pfSense handles many Internet connections well, allows for major flexibility in configuring my networks, and works perfectly with SSD drives.
If you want a extremely powerful router, but do not want to shovel out the money to buy a commercial setup, pfSense gives you a really great alternative.
To sum it up, pfSense is a great solution, open source, and available for free. I recommend you try it out for yourself. Click here to go to pfSense’s home webpage.
Posted in Internet and Servers, Operating Systems, Software
Response to “101 reasons why Linux is better than Windows” – Part 9
This is a response (Part 9; the last part of this series) to the web blog entitled “101 reasons why Linux is better than Windows”(http://cityblogger.com/archives/2007/01/24/101-reasons-why-linux-is-better-than-windows/)”. The author tries to discredit Windows by giving many reasons why Linux is “better”.
I will do my best to show how this is not the case. Operating systems are just tools. If you try to make one OS look “better” than another, you could possibly lead people into the wrong direction. Please note that the author has not written all 101 reasons on his blog. It appears he stopped writing it a while back. I will respond to everything he has currently written.
Direct quotes from the author are in red and my responses are in black. Please note that I mean no disrespect to the author in anything I say.
———————
80) Linux has bundled Databases such as MySQL and PostgreSQL which are extremely powerful and used in production environments. Customer doesn’t need to purchase expensive databases.
MySQL works wonderfully on Windows.
PostgreSQL is also available for Windows.
81) Linux is been used for super computing clusters, most of top super computers in the World use Linux. Windows just can’t scale to that level.
Actually Windows can and is used in super-computers, but Linux is the preferred OS for super-computing as well as having the most market share (for super-computers).
82) File system scalability: while NTFS file system can scale upto 16TB, XFS on Linux can scale upto 18 million TB! yes that bigger than what you would ever need.
Actually NTFS supports up to 256 Tebibytes in maximum volume size! Remember that with the proper drivers, Windows can read other file-systems. In addition, Windows can read more file-systems than just NTFS out of the box.
83) Processor scalability: Linux can scale to Unlimited processors. It is already running on a single system with 2048 CPUs. Windows can’t even claim to come anywhere near that number.
Linux does have a limit on the number of CPUs it can utilize, although it’s a relatively high one. It’s not entirely accurate to say that Linux can use an unlimited number of CPUs.
Similarly, Windows is also capable of scaling to support multiple CPUs, but as you mentioned, there may be licensing restrictions that apply, depending on the specific version and configuration of the operating system.
84) You have commands to check the systems Serial Number and other hardware information. to get serial number type:
dmidecode | grep “Serial Number” | head -n1 | sed -e ‘s/tSerial Number: //g’
or type dmidecode for all hardware info Read More. You can easily use this feature to extract data quickly and even write some scripts to do that.
Windows has a built-in program called “System Information” which will show you the same information.
———————
Well this is the end of Part 9. Thanks to everyone who has stuck around to read this entire series. It took me quite a while to write it up, but I hope that people will learn not to believe everything they read online about Windows and Linux.
Posted in Internet and Servers, Operating Systems